>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: maandag 17 november 2003 17:47
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Unico Hommes wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
> >>Why do we need a setStatus() on the response in the flow?
> >>
> >>Setting the status should IMO be available only by sending
> an empty response with redirector.sendStatus(), or through
> the "status-code" attribute on <map:read> and <map:serialize>.
> >>
> >
> >The status-code attribute on map:read and map:serialize
> aren't variable-resolved. So doing something like:
> >
> >flow.js:
> >function doSomething() {
> > var status = helper.doIt();
> > sendPage("done/"+status,null);
> >}
> >
> >sitemap.js:
> ><map:match pattern="done/*">
> > <map:generate src=".." />
> > <map:serialize status-code="{1}" />
> ></map:match>
> >
> >Will not work.
> >
> >
>
> Well, let's make status-code variable-resolvable if that's
> just what's missing!
>
+1
> >Instead, now we can do:
> >
> >flow.js
> >function doSomething() {
> > response.setStatus(helper.doIt());
> > sendPage("done",null);
> >}
> >
> >sitemap.js:
> ><map:match pattern="done">
> > <map:generate src=".." />
> > <map:serialize />
> ></map:match>
> >
> >
> >>Moreover, this introduces a dependency on the http
> environment, which isn't good.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yeah, that sucks.
> >
> >
>
> So, what about removing it and resolving the status-code?
> This seems way cleaner to me ;-)
>
I just remembered that there is a setStatus() method on the Environment
interface too. If we use that, perhaps we can keep the
response.setStatus() method. Or do you see other objections for this
method?
Unico
