Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: AW: AW: [jwt-dev] Extending the JWT Editor with Extension Points?

I've been trying to follow all of the recent emails on the topic, but I think I might be a bit lost. It's not exactly clear what you are extending in the discussions. From my point of view, there should be two meta-models: one that you use to describe a workflow, and one that describes the graphical representation of that workflow. Does this view fit into this discussion on extension points?

On Apr 22, 2008, at 10:57 AM, Florian Lautenbacher wrote:

Yes, it seems that an dynamic extension of the metamodel would be perfect. So we might integrate some classes into the metamodel which allow for an extension afterwards. I had a look at another tool (the one I mentioned in a mail earlier) and there it is the same: they have some defined extensions in the metamodel of the core product and extend these in other plugins lateron. So this would be kind of Dynamic EMF, but I'm not sure whether it is 100%
the idea described with Dynamic EMF.
I guess that would be a good approach: start with first classes (concepts in the metamodel) which are as generic as possible and which then serve as
extension points for other plugins.
Additionally we need some other extension points: custom property pages and pages for the editor itself which store the information about needed server,

Does this comment refer to the work I'm doing, or something different?

BTW, I'm not a workflow expert, so I apologize if you have to repeat yourself as I attempt to become educated on this topic. I'm very interested in this topic from a simplistic engineering point of view as a tool for solving a class of similar problems.


Back to the top