[Opensource] RE: Opensource digest, Vol 1 #1072 - 3 msgs
Marc Schipperheyn
m.schipperheyn at thefactore.com
Fri Feb 28 00:12:47 PST 2003
Frame are evil.
Marc
-----Original Message-----
From: opensource-admin at jcorporate.com
[mailto:opensource-admin at jcorporate.com]On Behalf Of
opensource-request at jcorporate.com
Sent: 25 February 2003 21:00
To: opensource at jcorporate.com
Subject: Opensource digest, Vol 1 #1072 - 3 msgs
Send Opensource mailing list submissions to
opensource at jcorporate.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.jcorporate.com/mailman/listinfo/opensource
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
opensource-request at jcorporate.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
opensource-admin at jcorporate.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Opensource digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. The Great Frames Debate (Michael Rimov)
2. Re: The Great Frames Debate (David Herron)
3. RE: implementing outer join in MultiDBObject? (Malcolm Wise)
--__--__--
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 13:32:44 -0800
To: opensource at jcorporate.com
From: Michael Rimov <rimovm at centercomp.com>
Subject: [Opensource] The Great Frames Debate
Reply-To: opensource at jcorporate.com
Hey All,
I'd like to see some suggestions about this particular issue:
Several people have voiced their disgust with the current frames used in
Expresso. I certainly agree that I'm not a frames fan myself. However,
here's the problem:
Currently by using frames, we have the ability to have items like DBMaint's
jsps to behave as a drop in replacement for people's applications. Since
DBMaint's JSP is just part of a frame, the jsp doesn't have to me modified
one iota to stand alone without the frames.
If we did everything via Tiles, then for folks to use the jsps, hand
editing would have to be done for each item that folks want to work
standalone.
Needless to say, this stinks.
So, is there anybody that has a suggestion on how to remove the frames,
WITHOUT removing any of the benefits that frames provide?
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
-Mike
--__--__--
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:23:41 -0800
Subject: Re: [Opensource] The Great Frames Debate
From: David Herron <davidh at 7gen.com>
To: opensource at jcorporate.com
Reply-To: opensource at jcorporate.com
On Monday, Feb 24, 2003, at 13:32 US/Pacific, Michael Rimov wrote:
> So, is there anybody that has a suggestion on how to remove the
> frames, WITHOUT removing any of the benefits that frames provide?
>
Well, to me the open question is whether the frames provide any benefit
at all.
I started to read up on Tiles but didn't get very deep into it before
getting drawn off into another high priority task. However, it seemed
to me that if an application were to supply the pieces & parts of its
content in the usual way, then tiles definitions can utilize those
pieces and parts while hiding the nastier parts of the URL's inside the
tiles definitions.
- David
--__--__--
Message: 3
From: "Malcolm Wise" <malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com>
To: <opensource at jcorporate.com>
Subject: RE: [Opensource] implementing outer join in MultiDBObject?
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 08:05:17 -0000
Reply-To: opensource at jcorporate.com
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_008A_01C2DCA4.A3340D80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mike,
I've checked this in. It's pretty basic at the moment, but when I get time
I'll flesh it out a bit.
Cheers
Malc
-----Original Message-----
From: opensource-admin at jcorporate.com
[mailto:opensource-admin at jcorporate.com]On Behalf Of Mike Traum
Sent: 21 February 2003 19:30
To: 'opensource at jcorporate.com'
Subject: RE: [Opensource] implementing outer join in MultiDBObject?
That sounds like what I'm looking for. I don't need it asap, so in the head
would be great.
Thanks a lot,
mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Malcolm Wise [mailto:malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com]
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 3:44 AM
To: opensource at jcorporate.com
Subject: RE: [Opensource] implementing outer join in MultiDBObject?
Hi Mike,
I did actually implement this in my own code, but in the end didn't use it
because I accomplished the same thing using ValidValues. I basically added
some setter methods to MultiDBObject along the lines of the setForeignKey()
method - setInnerJoin(String leftShortName, String leftColumn, String
rightShortName, String rightColumn), setLeftJoin(Stringl eftShortName,
String leftColumn, String rightShortName, String rightColumn) and
setRightJoin(String leftShortName, String leftColumn, String rightShortName,
String rightColumn). The joins are built using ANSI syntax in the FROM
clause, so should be pretty portable (I use Sybase ASE12). I've only
allowed for '=' in the join, but it shouldn't be a great deal more work to
allow for others (just an extra parameter for the above methods should do
it). Here's an example of what's produced:
SELECT table1.x, table1.y, table2.z
FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2 ON table1.a = table2.b
If this seems to fit the bill, I can make the changes in HEAD, or I can
send you the details off-list if you need it sooner
(malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com).
Cheers,
Malc
-----Original Message-----
From: opensource-admin at jcorporate.com
[mailto:opensource-admin at jcorporate.com]On Behalf Of Mike Traum
Sent: 21 February 2003 01:06
To: Expresso Mailing List (E-mail)
Subject: [Opensource] implementingo uter join in MultiDBObject?
Something I've been wondering for a while is why outer join's are
implemented in MultiDBObject. The way I see it, it would be quite simple -
just have a setter and then check for that, adding 'OUTER JOIN' ('left' and
'right' if you want to support that) to the where clause. Am I missing
something or should I go for it? (the only thing I could think of is
database incompatibilities, which seems unlikely)
thanks,
mike
*************************************************************************
The information contained in this message or any of its
attachments may be privileged and confidential and intended
for the exclusive use of the addressee. If you are not the
addressee any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other
dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited
*************************************************************************
------=_NextPart_000_008A_01C2DCA4.A3340D80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4912.300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Mike,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I've checked this in. It's pretty basic =
at the=20
moment, but when I get time I'll flesh it out a bit.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Cheers</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D851290208-25022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans Unicode" =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Malc</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
opensource-admin at jcorporate.com =
[mailto:opensource-admin at jcorporate.com]<B>On=20
Behalf Of </B>Mike Traum<BR><B>Sent:</B> 21 February 2003 =
19:30<BR><B>To:</B>=20
'opensource at jcorporate.com'<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Opensource] =
implementing=20
outer join in MultiDBObject?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D282223719-21022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>That=20
sounds like what I'm looking for. I don't need it asap, so in the head =
would be=20
great.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D282223719-21022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D282223719-21022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Thanks=20
a lot,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D282223719-21022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>mike</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Malcolm Wise=20
[mailto:malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, February =
21,=20
2003 3:44 AM<BR><B>To:</B> =
opensource at jcorporate.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE:=20
[Opensource] implementing outer join in =
MultiDBObject?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Hi Mike,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I did actually implement this in my own code, =
but in the=20
end didn't use it because I accomplished the same thing using=20
ValidValues. I basically added some setter methods to=20
MultiDBObject along the lines of the setForeignKey() method -=20
setInnerJoin(String leftShortName, String leftColumn, String =
rightShortName,=20
String rightColumn), setLeftJoin(Stringl eftShortName, String =
leftColumn,=20
String rightShortName, String rightColumn) and setRightJoin(String=20
leftShortName, String leftColumn, String rightShortName, String=20
rightColumn). The joins are built using ANSI syntax in the=20
FROM clause, so should be pretty portable (I use Sybase =
ASE12). =20
I've only allowed for '=3D' in the join, but it shouldn't be a great =
deal more=20
work to allow for others (just an extra parameter for the above =
methods should=20
do it). Here's an example of what's =
produced:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>SELECT table1.x, table1.y, =
table2.z</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2 ON table1.a =3D=20
table2.b</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>If this seems to fit the bill, I can make the =
changes in=20
HEAD, or I can send you the details off-list if you need it sooner (<A =
=
href=3D"mailto:malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com">malcolm.wise at sde.eu.sony.com=
</A>).</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Cheers,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Malc</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D250592208-21022003><FONT face=3D"Lucida Sans =
Unicode"=20
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
opensource-admin at jcorporate.com =
[mailto:opensource-admin at jcorporate.com]<B>On=20
Behalf Of </B>Mike Traum<BR><B>Sent:</B> 21 February 2003 =
01:06<BR><B>To:</B>=20
Expresso Mailing List (E-mail)<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Opensource] =
implementingo=20
uter join in MultiDBObject?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D748250501-21022003><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>Something I've=20
been wondering for a while is why outer join's are implemented in=20
MultiDBObject. The way I see it, it would be quite simple - just have =
a setter=20
and then check for that, adding 'OUTER JOIN' ('left' and 'right' if =
you want=20
to support that) to the where clause. Am I missing something or should =
I go=20
for it? (the only thing I could think of is database =
incompatibilities, which=20
seems unlikely)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D748250501-21022003><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D748250501-21022003><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>thanks,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D748250501-21022003><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>mike</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D748250501-21022003><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><CODE><FONT=20
=
size=3D3><BR><BR>********************************************************=
*****************<BR>The=20
information contained in this message or any of its<BR>attachments may =
be=20
privileged and confidential and intended <BR>for the exclusive use of =
the=20
addressee. If you are not the<BR>addressee any disclosure, =
reproduction,=20
distribution or other<BR>dissemination or use of this communication is =
strictly=20
=
prohibited<BR>***********************************************************=
**************<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></CODE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_008A_01C2DCA4.A3340D80--
--__--__--
_______________________________________________
Opensource mailing list
Opensource at jcorporate.com
http://mail.jcorporate.com/mailman/listinfo/opensource
End of Opensource Digest
More information about the Opensource
mailing list