Thanks Jeanne. Good point... But do you see anything wrong with this approach? I fear that it is not the most standard way, and / or it may just be adding unwanted complexity. Has anyone seen this before?
Sam Carlac wrote:They encapsulate logic for different things. SessionFacade X really only centralizes transaction management and security, delegating calls to the other two facades.
SessionFacade X has all the methods which SessionFacade A and B have - it just delegates (this is what i don't like). I thought of putting all logic into X, but thought that was a bit messy.
hmm. Im thinking I can leave as is if I explain my reasons properly.
I look into it this way:
Firstly: 'They encapsulate logic for different things' - so the managed bean has two distinct types of functionalities. Adding one more 'facade' does not help much practically, just an extra later. I would keep it first way you did, it is simpler.
Secondly: Seems managed bean(and hence ui page) is supporting a lot of functionality. Is it possible to split two groups of functionalities in different pages (and use two managed beans) ?
(even say, one jsp includes another jsp..and so on )
Sorry, I was probably of not much help... but thats how I would have thought through the problem.
SCJP 1.4, SCJD-1.4, SCBCD-5, OCMJEA-5.
I’ve looked at a lot of different solutions, and in my humble opinion Aspose is the way to go. Here’s the link: http://aspose.com