PDA

View Full Version : The ideal VDF4Web development environment



Marco
27-Jul-2006, 12:50 AM
I had a play with Ruby on Rails. This is basically a framework for
building web applications. In the initial 'Hello world' type application
(except is is categories and recipes), the simplicity of creating a
webapp is stunning. After the database tables are created it is one
command per table.

The reason I started this post like this, is because I personally find
this idea very attractive for VDF4Web. Ones the Tables and Data
Dictionaries are created, the developer should be able to create the web
application (.ASP + .WO) with one button press per table.

Now many many questions are asked in the wizard that most of us, leave
default 99% of the time. This is fine for existing developers but the
number of questions can be daunting for a new developer.

Also, based on the cascade delete setting, the application can determine
the structure of header-detail entry.

Eg. An sales person would not have a cascade delete set. This could be
interpreted as the child tables have a foreign key combo box.

Eg2. An order would have cascade delete set to true. This could be
interpreted that order lines, must be presented on the same page as
orders as a header/detail entry or report.

Basically what I would like to see is that nobody needs to do anything
in ASP or in WO, to get a basic web application running (Entry pages and
Report/List pages).

This would require a security object. The security object in its most
simple form would be an codemast/codetype kind of interface where you
can set a field as 'Display only' or 'Invisible'. In the augmented form,
a developer can have roles and rights depending on views/pages etc. in
own tables.

The security object, would then take care of knowing what fields to
render, and how.

A change to the DD and a recompile should make these changes visible. So
no longer use of 'design time' labels etc., just only support 'compile
time'. This is I believe the only one logical to a new user anyway, and
now WAS is a lot quicker than the 2.0 days, not noticeable in speed.

Anyway, perhaps I'm from another planet,
Any reactions are very welcome.

Cheers,
Marco

Peter Bosch
27-Jul-2006, 07:30 AM
Hi Marco,

I agree. But my vision is to have one visual designer and with a mouseclick
I can create a VDF or a WebApp from the same source. ;-)

Peter

"Marco Kuipers" <marco.kuipers@nci.com.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1GjZuCUsGHA.436@dacmail.dataaccess.com...
>I had a play with Ruby on Rails. This is basically a framework for building
>web applications. In the initial 'Hello world' type application (except is
>is categories and recipes), the simplicity of creating a webapp is
>stunning. After the database tables are created it is one command per
>table.
>
> The reason I started this post like this, is because I personally find
> this idea very attractive for VDF4Web. Ones the Tables and Data
> Dictionaries are created, the developer should be able to create the web
> application (.ASP + .WO) with one button press per table.
>
> Now many many questions are asked in the wizard that most of us, leave
> default 99% of the time. This is fine for existing developers but the
> number of questions can be daunting for a new developer.
>
> Also, based on the cascade delete setting, the application can determine
> the structure of header-detail entry.
>
> Eg. An sales person would not have a cascade delete set. This could be
> interpreted as the child tables have a foreign key combo box.
>
> Eg2. An order would have cascade delete set to true. This could be
> interpreted that order lines, must be presented on the same page as orders
> as a header/detail entry or report.
>
> Basically what I would like to see is that nobody needs to do anything in
> ASP or in WO, to get a basic web application running (Entry pages and
> Report/List pages).
>
> This would require a security object. The security object in its most
> simple form would be an codemast/codetype kind of interface where you can
> set a field as 'Display only' or 'Invisible'. In the augmented form, a
> developer can have roles and rights depending on views/pages etc. in own
> tables.
>
> The security object, would then take care of knowing what fields to
> render, and how.
>
> A change to the DD and a recompile should make these changes visible. So
> no longer use of 'design time' labels etc., just only support 'compile
> time'. This is I believe the only one logical to a new user anyway, and
> now WAS is a lot quicker than the 2.0 days, not noticeable in speed.
>
> Anyway, perhaps I'm from another planet,
> Any reactions are very welcome.
>
> Cheers,
> Marco

Marco
27-Jul-2006, 07:08 PM
Hi Peter,

Well Microsoft is going that way. An XML based document is used to
define the layout. Eg what is combo box, location of individual objects
etc. Then during the compiling this information is used to create a
webpage or an executable (not sure if perhaps in the webapp it is
interpreted at runtime).

But in DataFlex we have already a lot of information like that in our
fantastically powerfull DataDictionaries. We 'know' if a field is
display_only, if it needs to be 'capitalised', if there is a navigation
validation, what kind of object needs to be rendered etc.

What we are missing, is a layer of dynamicaly hide/display_only fields
based on user rights. I guess we also miss in the DD a bit more of
layout structure, to have the same.

But back to my point, I think it would be fantastic if using the current
techniques, a wizard would be available for a 'one keypress webapp'.

The ASP would ask the DD 'Can I render this field', based on the rights
(either 'static' or 'extremely dynamic') the field gets rendered. The
way it is rendered is again provided by the DD.

Anyway, I might be living in dreamland...

Cheers,
Marco


Peter Bosch wrote:
> Hi Marco,
>
> I agree. But my vision is to have one visual designer and with a mouseclick
> I can create a VDF or a WebApp from the same source. ;-)
>
> Peter
>
> "Marco Kuipers" <marco.kuipers@nci.com.au> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:1GjZuCUsGHA.436@dacmail.dataaccess.com...
>
>>I had a play with Ruby on Rails. This is basically a framework for building
>>web applications. In the initial 'Hello world' type application (except is
>>is categories and recipes), the simplicity of creating a webapp is
>>stunning. After the database tables are created it is one command per
>>table.
>>
>>The reason I started this post like this, is because I personally find
>>this idea very attractive for VDF4Web. Ones the Tables and Data
>>Dictionaries are created, the developer should be able to create the web
>>application (.ASP + .WO) with one button press per table.
>>
>>Now many many questions are asked in the wizard that most of us, leave
>>default 99% of the time. This is fine for existing developers but the
>>number of questions can be daunting for a new developer.
>>
>>Also, based on the cascade delete setting, the application can determine
>>the structure of header-detail entry.
>>
>>Eg. An sales person would not have a cascade delete set. This could be
>>interpreted as the child tables have a foreign key combo box.
>>
>>Eg2. An order would have cascade delete set to true. This could be
>>interpreted that order lines, must be presented on the same page as orders
>>as a header/detail entry or report.
>>
>>Basically what I would like to see is that nobody needs to do anything in
>>ASP or in WO, to get a basic web application running (Entry pages and
>>Report/List pages).
>>
>>This would require a security object. The security object in its most
>>simple form would be an codemast/codetype kind of interface where you can
>>set a field as 'Display only' or 'Invisible'. In the augmented form, a
>>developer can have roles and rights depending on views/pages etc. in own
>>tables.
>>
>>The security object, would then take care of knowing what fields to
>>render, and how.
>>
>>A change to the DD and a recompile should make these changes visible. So
>>no longer use of 'design time' labels etc., just only support 'compile
>>time'. This is I believe the only one logical to a new user anyway, and
>>now WAS is a lot quicker than the 2.0 days, not noticeable in speed.
>>
>>Anyway, perhaps I'm from another planet,
>>Any reactions are very welcome.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Marco
>
>
>