Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2004 2:19 pm
by timvw
Currently i have a little website that outputs xhtml and wml. But the templates get their data from a Smarty object instead of an xml file.
As i said before, it all depends in your needs. If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2004 2:55 pm
by McGruff
timvw wrote:If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
Apart from the question of how well MVC can be applied to dynamic websites, what is the advantage of passing data to the model in xml? Wouldn't that be better off encapsulated in some kind of ModelData object?
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2004 3:06 pm
by Gen-ik
I agree.
I'm not saying that XML is a waste of time because it's not, and when it's used in the right places and in the right way then it's a very powerful tool. All I'm saying is that a lot of people use it because they can, and not because they need to

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2004 6:00 pm
by timvw
McGruff wrote:timvw wrote:If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
Apart from the question of how well MVC can be applied to dynamic websites, what is the advantage of passing data to the model in xml? Wouldn't that be better off encapsulated in some kind of ModelData object?
That's why i've repeatedly said: it all depends on your needs.
At a given point you decide: i use 'cgi' to pass data between webserver and script. Just as you decide i use 'foo' to pass data between script and template.