It sounds like you're complaining about the way the different pieces are named. Who cares? You're right that the way Smalltalk defines things is not the same as most web versions do it, but that doesn't diminish the usefulness of the architecture. Jamming the logic for processing input and the logic for displaying it into one "component" doesn't seem like an improvement -- that will just make it hard to change the presentation when you need to.
To me, the bottom line is that a web architecture must support having a designer who doesn't know Perl working on the HTML. Template oriented structures like MVC do this well. Your architecture doesn't look like it will.
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|
