RE: Database Maintenance Models

> JAVA400-L is a programming list, not a product showcase.

Wouldn't you agree, Joe, that Midrange lists are among the POOREST of
product showcases?  Most vendors wouldn't discuss their products and
programming techniques here from fear of disclosing a trade secret.  You, I,
and Paul seem to be exceptions to that generalization.

There are at least two (2) motives for me discussing this topic that take
precedence over raising awareness of Relational-Web.  I've gained some
useful information over the past couple weeks, and I don't want my
conscience accusing me of giving nothing back.  And, I'm working on a new
development project that involves the replacement of several hundred 5250
screens, where feedback from this list would be helpful.  Wouldn't the topic
of UI design patterns be appropriate on ANY developer list?

I've had the means of implementing program "skeletons" as you call them for
several years, but lacked a UI design patterns that anyone besides myself
could agree with.  More recently, I've been working with a UI design team
that has come up with a more comprehensive model, which I thought might be
of interest to readers here.

> See, you're already narrowing down the look and feel
> to your specific UI requirements.

Precisely.

> In your situation, how much extra work would it be to
> add ... feature?

Good question.  If every screen were defined as meta-data, and generated
from a utility, I imagine the programming interface would be rather limited.
If the programming interface were a base class, perhaps the ability to
extend that class would offer more flexibility.  If the interface were even
less rigid than typical OO extensions, perhaps we've arrived at the ultimate
compromise between flexibility and built-in functionality.

In the case of Servlets, using a meta-data driven utility has the added
concern of scalability.  Say there are hundreds of users maintaining
hundreds of files.  Wouldn't channeling every request through one Servlet
offer a substantial bottleneck?

Nathan.