mirrors/EWF
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Updated EWSGI (markdown)

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
jocelyn
2011-09-05 06:54:29 -07:00
parent 4744bb15c3
commit 597f4bc6bd
1 changed files with 47 additions and 9 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

56
EWSGI.md
View File

@@ -3,14 +3,52 @@
- And below the various calls for decisions, and effective decisions - And below the various calls for decisions, and effective decisions
### return type of parameter (and similar) should be deferred WGI_VALUE # In progress
* Description: Instead of returning READABLE_STRING_32 , it would be better to use **WGI_VALUE** .
This allows to have various types such as WGI_STRING_VALUE, WGI_LIST_VALUE, WGI_TABLE_VALUE, WGI_FILE_VALUE .
* Status: proposed on 2011-09-05. ### Return type of `parameter' (and similar query_, form_data_ ...) should be deferred WGI_VALUE
* **WAITING FOR APPROVAL** - Code: **P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE**
- Status: proposed on 2011-09-05.
- **WAITING FOR APPROVAL**
### <strike>change prefix from EWSGI_ to WGI_ </strike> > Instead of returning just `READABLE_STRING_32` , it would be better to use **WGI_VALUE** .
* Description: shorter and pronouncable prefix > Mainly to address the multiple value for the same param name, but also for uploaded files.
* Status: **adopted** > This allows to have various types such as WGI_STRING_VALUE, WGI_LIST_VALUE, WGI_TABLE_VALUE, WGI_FILE_VALUE .
* Decision: **WGI_** >
> Thus we would have: <code>parameter (a_name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL): detachable WGI_VALUE </code>
### Include the parameter's name in WGI_VALUE interface
- Code: **P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE_interface**
- Dependence: adoption of P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE , may impact on P-2011-09-05-parameters_ITERABLE
- Status: proposed on 2011-09-05 **WAITING FOR APPROVAL**
> include the corresponding parameter's name in WGI_VALUE interface.
> Such as `{WGI_VALUE}.name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL` (or READABLE_STRING_32).
>
> This would also allow a nicer signature for `parameters: ITERABLE [WGI__VALUE]'
> instead of `parameters: ITERABLE [TUPLE [name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL; value: WGI__VALUE]]'
### Signature of parameters (and similar) using ITERABLE [...]
- Code: **P-2011-09-05-parameters_ITERABLE**
- Status: proposed on 2011-09-05 **WAITING FOR APPROVAL**
> Description: Instead of forcing the implementation to use HASH_TABLE, DS_HASH_TABLE, DS_HASH_SET, ... or similar
> we should use `ITERABLE`
>
> `parameters: ITERABLE [TUPLE [name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL; value: WGI_VALUE]]`
>
> Or, if `P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE_interface` is adopted (WGI_VALUE.name holds the related parameter's name)
>
> `parameters: ITERABLE [WGI_VALUE]`
# Adopted entries
### Change prefix from EWSGI_ to WGI_
- Code: **P-2011-08-29-WGI_prefix**
- Status: **adopted**
- Decision: **WGI_**
> shorter and pronouncable prefix for EWSGI class names
# Rejected entries
...