[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Web Console: Context Menus and Navigation
by david.lloyd@jboss.com
Tom noted to me that the context menus are confusing and annoying (I'm heavily paraphrasing here), and I happen to agree.
His suggestion is to use the largely empty top area for navigation. I think that's a good idea, but I also think there needs to be a way to deal with the "two-dimensional" aspect of the jpdl domain model.
What I mean is this: you can be working in the context of a process definition, a process instance, a task definition, and a task instance; in addition it may make sense to make a context based on the current token.
Now bear with me here, it gets a bit confusing. Having a process instance implies a process definition. Having a task definition implies a process definition as well. Having a task instance implies both a process instance and a task definition. So, given the context of a task instance, one could navigate "up" to the task instance, or "up" to the process instance. And both make sense; if someone wants to examine the task definition for their task, they should be able to. And if someone wants to look at the process instance, maybe to see what all the tasks are on the process, that's a logical navigation direction as well.
So what I propose is to have two rows of navigation that could look something like this (please forgive this dumb ugly mockup):
| Process "websale" version 1 ID 7 Process Instance ID 45
|
|
| Task "Collect Money" ID 12 Task Instance ID 56
|
I can make it look a lot nicer than that though... I hope. :-)
Opine at will.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3987005#3987005
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3987005
19 years, 4 months
[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: .xhtml files give download popup
by david.lloyd@jboss.com
"kukeltje" wrote : Shoot me....
|
| I've been struggeling with this the whole afternoon and now I was about to give up, it 'works'. Still, I have this funny feeling. Am I correct that we on purpose not use the facelets viewhandler, but do use facelets? Is there a specific reason for this and doesn't limit certain facelets functionality?
Yes, this is on purpose. We use a chained view handler. First in the chain is JbpmViewHandler, then the ajax4jsf view handler, and finally the standard Facelets view handler. The chaining is performed automatically by ajax4jsf. There is a context parameter that defines the chaining order.
"kukeltje" wrote : What I mean is what is the advantage over the version about a month ago where .xhtml files were addressed? I'm confused and others might be as well.
Basically, I need to put in a security constraint so that getting an .xhtml file results in an error. All the xhtml pages are served via facelets as .jsf action URLs.
"kukeltje" wrote : Btw, I'm impressed by all the work that went into the webapp and the progress that has been made, so no negative word about that.
Thanks. :-)
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3986991#3986991
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3986991
19 years, 4 months