I develop most of my web applications using CodeIgniter, and have always took the approach of validating form data inside the controller, using the built in Form Validation class, before sending this data to the Model to be used, e.g insert the data into the database.
However, I keep hearing the "skinny controllers, fat models" line - and I'm wondering if these validation checks should be placed inside the model.
Three things strike me when I think of using this approach.
How can different error messages be shown to the user, without returning seemingly ugly arrays or objects from these model functions? e.g A duplicate email on signing up for an account. Would the method responsible for adding a user in the model have to return an array or object to indicate if the insert was successful, and any error messages?
By doing the validation checks in the model, checking variables supplied to the methods from the controller (not POST data), I will lose the use of the Form Validation class, a class that I find very useful in my projects. Would you suggest that I write a class, or library that can be used like a CI library to mimic the Form Validation class, but for supplied variables, and not limited to the POST data?
Following on from that concern...as the POST data would have to be validated for existence (isset($_POST['myvar'])) before being passed to the model, should the rest of the validation not just be placed in the controller as well?
Any suggestions, advice, opinions will be appreciated!
Your original issue comes from fact that CodeIgniter's interpretation of MVC is quite appalling. This framework pretends that View is just a template, and Model is just an ORM ( which some say, should be classified as anti-pattern ). Which is completely wrong, and forces bot business and presentation logic inside the Controller.
But lets leave View aside.
Model in MVC is not a class or an object. Model is a layer, which contains all the business logic. It is actually comprised of instances from multitude of classes. The two most prevalent groups are Domain Objects [1] [2] (this is, what people people usually call "models") and object responsible for information storage and retrieval - usually DataMappers. The model layer also contains standalone components (both your own and 3rd party) and higher level abstractions - services.
What you have as Validation class, might be considered to be a standalone component, which can either be used by Domain object to perform validation, or expect a Domain object to be passed in for validation .. depends on your implementation.
In your situation i would handle this at the service layer. Which would either provide the instance of View class with a valid domain object, or an object, which represents the error.
Some reading materials yu might be interest in:
GUI Architectures
AnemicDomainModel
Tell, Don't ask
Then again .. what the hell i know of it all ..
Related
I’m trying to create an authentication system in php with the Slim3 framework along with the Twig template system, and for the database I’m using MySQL with PDO. I’m also trying to implement it using a model view controller design pattern. However I’m having difficulty understanding how to use an MVC structure for a web application. I’ve looked at a plethora of explanations on the web and there doesn’t seem to be a clear cut answer. A lot of people say to to use a php framework such as Laravel, Symfony or CodeIgniter as they apparently employ an MVC like structure. However I would much rather keep things simple and to write the code manually rather than using a framework.
Currently there are two interpretations of MVC that I see. The first one being depicted in this diagram:
The other interpretation I’ve seen is this: (which is taken from this YouTube video)
I have done my research. Questions and answers such as this and this have been helpful. But I’m still not sure how I might structure my own applications, specifically indentifying and understanding the model aspect of MVC. I’ll now explain the register process of my authentication app. So you have an idea how my code is works.
Firstly I have an SQLQueries class that simply puts a series of SQL statements into functions. I then have a SQLWrapper class that has functions that can for example store a new users details inside the database. This class also calls functions from the SQLQueries class. I also have a ValidateSanitize class that has functions that cleans user input as well as checking if user input is valid in the form. These three classes I think are part of the model aspect of MVC but I'm not sure. I see a lot of other tutorials using a ‘User Model class’ but I can’t find the need for one in my application.
My views are simply Twig templates that display html, such as the homepage, register, login etc. I then have controllers. I intend to have multiple controllers that do different things. For now I’ve only implemented the AuthController which is responsible for Registering and Signing a user in.
So the first thing the AuthController does is to display the register form in a function called getRegisterForm. Once the user has submitted the form the postRegisterForm function takes that user input and assigns it to tainted variables.
public function postRegisterForm($request, $response)
{
$arr_tainted_params = $request->getParsedBody();
$tainted_email = $arr_tainted_params['email']; it a variable
$tainted_username = $arr_tainted_params['username'];
$tainted_password = $arr_tainted_params['password'];
$tainted_password_confirm = $arr_tainted_params['password_confirm'];
Next all of the three previous classes as well as the database details are instantiated so their functions can be used in the AuthController:
$sanitizer_validator = $this->container->ValidateSanitize;
$sql_wrapper = $this->container->SQLWrapper;
$sql_queries = $this->container->SQLQueries;
$db_handle = $this->container->get('dbase');
The tainted user details are then cleaned with the sanitize_input function. The cleaned user details are then fed into the validate functions to make sure they don’t trigger any validation violations. The password is also hashed here:
$cleaned_email = $sanitizer_validator->sanitize_input($tainted_email, FILTER_SANITIZE_EMAIL);
$cleaned_username = $sanitizer_validator->sanitize_input($tainted_username, FILTER_SANITIZE_STRING);
$cleaned_password = $sanitizer_validator->sanitize_input($tainted_password, FILTER_SANITIZE_STRING);
$cleaned_password_confirm = $sanitizer_validator->sanitize_input($tainted_password_confirm, FILTER_SANITIZE_STRING);
$hashed_cleaned_password = password_hash($cleaned_password, PASSWORD_DEFAULT);
$sanitizer_validator->check_email_exists($cleaned_email);
$sanitizer_validator->validate_email($cleaned_email);
$sanitizer_validator->validate_username($cleaned_username);
$sanitizer_validator->validate_password($cleaned_password);
$sanitizer_validator→validate_password_confirm($cleaned_password_confirm);
Finally there is an if statement that checks to see if all validation error messages are empty. If they are we provide the SQLWrapper class with the database details as well as a SQLQueries class object. We then insert the users details into the database by calling the SQLWrapper classes store-details function. Finally we direct the user to the login page, so the user can sign into their newly registered account.
if ($sanitizer_validator->get_validate_messages('email_error') == ' ' && $sanitizer_validator->get_validate_messages('username_error') == ' '
&& $sanitizer_validator->get_validate_messages('password_error') == ' ' && $sanitizer_validator->check_passwords_match($cleaned_password, $cleaned_password_confirm ) == true
&& $sanitizer_validator->check_email_exists($cleaned_email) == false)
{
$sql_wrapper->set_db_handle($db_handle);
$sql_wrapper->set_sql_queries($sql_queries);
$sql_wrapper->store_details($cleaned_email, $cleaned_username, $hashed_cleaned_password);
return $response→withRedirect($this→container→router→pathFor('login'));
}
However if any of the validate error messages are not blank, then we call the SanitiseValidate display_validate_messages which simply sets the messages into a session to be displayed on the register twig template. We then redirect back to the register page so the user can see the validation error messages.
else
{
$sanitizer_validator->display_validate_messages();
return $response->withRedirect($this->container->router->pathFor('register'));
}
}
So based on this structure of a user registering an account. Does this adhere to a clean simple MVC structure or do some changes need to be made? Do any of my classes take the role of a model? Any suggestions and tips regarding my structure will be appreciated.
The full application can be seen on my GitHub if that would be helpful. Note that this version is slightly older than the sample code I used in this question.
Indeed, there are multiple approaches regarding how the MVC pattern should be applied in web applications. This multitude of variants is the result of the simple fact, that the original MVC pattern - developed for desktop applications (by Trygve Reenskaug, in 1979) - can not be applied as is to the web applications. Here is a little description. But, from this set of approaches, you can choose one which best complies with your requirements. Maybe you'll try more of them before you'll make your mind. Though, at some point, you'll know which one fits to your vision.
In the following diagrams I tried to present my chosen approach on the web MVC workflow - mainly inspired by Robert Martin's presentation Keynote: Architecture the Lost Years (licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0).
In general, you could think of a web MVC application as composed of the following parts:
Domain model (e.g. model, e.g. model layer);
Service layer (optional);
Delivery mechanism;
Other components (like own libraries, etc).
1) The domain model should consist of the following components:
Entities (e.g. domain objects) and value objects. They model the business rules in terms of properties and behavior and, being application-independent, can be used by multiple (types of) applications.
(Data) mappers and, optional, repositories. These components are responsible with the persistence logic.
External services. They are used to perform different tasks involving the use of external/own libraries (like sending emails, parsing documents, etc).
Further, the domain model could be split into two parts:
a) Domain model abstraction. This would be the only space of the model layer accessed by the components of the delivery mechanism, or by the services of the service layer - if one is implemented:
Entities and value objects;
(Data) mapper abstractions and, optional, repository abstractions;
Abstractions of external services.
Note: By abstractions I mean interfaces and abstract classes.
b) Domain model implementation. This space would be the one in which the implementations of the different domain model abstractions (see a) would reside. The dependency injection container (as part of the delivery mechanism) will be responsible with passing instances of these concrete classes as dependencies - as constructor arguments, for example - to the other components of the application (like controllers, views, services, etc).
2) Service layer (optional): Technically, the components of the delivery mechanism could directly interact with the elements of the domain model. Though such interactions involve (a lot of) operations, specific only to the model, not to the delivery mechanism. Therefore, a good choice is to defer the execution of these operations to service classes (e.g. services), as part of the so-called service layer. The delivery mechanism components will then use only these services to access the domain model components.
Note: The service layer can, actually, be seen as part of the model layer. In my diagrams bellow I preferred to display it as a layer residing outside the model. But, in the file system example, I put the corresponding folder in the domain space.
3) The delivery mechanism sums up the constructs used to assure the interaction between the user and the model layer's components. By user I don't mean a person, but an interface with which a person can interact - like a browser, a console (e.g. CLI), a desktop GUI, etc.
Web server: parses the user request through a single point of entry (index.php).
Dependency injection container: provides the proper dependencies to the different components of the application.
HTTP message (e.g. HTTP request and HTTP response) abstraction (see PSR-7: HTTP message interfaces).
Router: matches the request components (HTTP method and URI path) against the components of each route (HTTP method and pattern) in a predefined list of routes and returns the matched route, if found.
Front controller: matches the user request against a route and dispatches it to a certain controller and/or view action.
Controllers. They write (e.g. perform create, update and delete operations) to the model layer and (should) expect no results. This can happen by directly interacting with the components defined in the domain model, or, preferably, by only interacting with the service classes.
Views. They should be classes, not template files. They can receive a template engine as dependency. They only fetch data (e.g. perform read operations) from the model layer. Either by directly interacting with the components defined in the domain model, or, preferably, by only interacting with the service classes. Also, they decide which result (like a string), or template file content, will be displayed to the user. A view action should always return a HTTP response object (maybe as defined by the PSR-7 specification), whose body will be before-hand updated with the mentioned result or template file content.
Template files. Should be kept as simple as possible. The whole presentation logic should happen only in the view instances. So, the template files should contain only variables (be they pure PHP ones, or presented with the used template engine syntax) and, maybe, some simple conditional statements, or loops.
Response emitter: reads the body of the HTTP response instance returned by the view and prints it.
4) Other components. As wished. For example some libraries developed by your own. Like an implementation of the PSR-7 abstraction.
How I chose to dispatch the user request:
As you see in the diagrams above, the front controller dispatches the user request not only to a controller action (in order to update the domain model), but also to a view action (in order to read and display the updated state/data from the model layer). Kind of a splitted dispatch. This can be relatively easy achieved by assigning the controller action and the view action to each route (like bellow), and telling the front controller to call them successively:
<?php
use MyApp\UI\Web\Application\View;
use MyApp\UI\Web\Application\Controller;
// Note: $this specifies a RouteCollection to which the route is added.
$this->post('/upload', [
'controller' => [Controller\Upload::class, 'uploadFiles'],
'view' => [View\Upload::class, 'uploadFiles'],
]);
This approach gives flexibility in regard to the user request dispatch. For example, the name of the view action can be different from the name of the controller action. Or, in order to only fetch model layer data, you don't need to dispatch the user request to a controller, but only to a view. Therefore you don't need to assign a controller action in the route at all:
<?php
use MyApp\UI\Web\Application\View;
$this->get('/upload', [View\Upload::class, 'listFiles']);
File system structure example:
myapp/domain: folder containing the domain model classes and the services. This directory could be brought into the "myapp/web/src" folder, but it shouldn't, because the model layer and the service layer are not part of the delivery mechanism.
myapp/web: folder containing the delivery mechanism classes. Its name depicts the type of application - can be a web app, a cli app, etc.
myapp/web/src:
Resources:
*) Sandro Mancuso : An introduction to interaction-driven design
*) The ones listed in an older answer of mine.
*) The tutorials presented by Alejandro Gervasio:
Building a Domain Model – An Introduction to Persistence Agnosticism
Building a Domain Model – Integrating Data Mappers
Handling Collections of Aggregate Roots – the Repository Pattern
An Introduction to Services
*) The example on the Slim 3 page: Action-Domain-Responder with Slim.
There is a course where you get walked through making MVC with slim 3. Ill link it here : https://codecourse.com/courses/slim-3-authentication . Hope this helped, its a really easy to follow course and you learn alot.
I have the common MVC situation in my PHP system: the Controller receive a request from the View containing $_POST data. Now I have three ways to handle the data:
a) The Controller only calls the Model and the Model handle the $_POST data.
b) The Controller transforms the $_POST data into variables and pass them to Model.
c) The Controller transforms $_POST data into a Model's domain object and only pass the object to Model.
Currently, I am following option A, but I believe it is wrong, so I am thinking of using option C.
So, according to MVC, what is the right way to handle $_POST data?
EDIT At the moment, I'm not using any MVC framework.
EDIT 2 Generally, the same Controller handles request from a browser, a web service, an offline application, etc, or each one has it own Controller?
The best option is to use #2 approach, with some alterations.
I would write it as something like this:
public function postLogin( $request )
{
$service = $this->serviceFactory->build('Recognition');
$service->authenticate( $request->getParam('username'),
$request->getParam('password') );
}
// Yes, that's the whole method
There is no need to actually create variables, if you have used something like a Request instance to abstract the user's input.
Also, you might want to replace theRequest::getParam()method with something likeRequest::getPost()- although I have come to the conclusion that, in a correctly structured application, theGETandPOSTparameters should not share same name.
The serviceFactory which you see in the code snippet would be an object that you inject in both controller and view instance. It would let you share same service instances between controllers and views.
It is responsible for creation of services (which would contain the application logic, while leaving the domain business logic in the domain objects), which helps you isolate the interaction between domain entities and storage abstractions from the presentation layer.
About the other options:
The Controller only calls the Model and the Model handle the $_POST data.
In the MVC and MVC-inspired design patterns the model should be aware of neither the user interface nor of the presentation layer as whole. The $_POST variable in PHP is a superglobal.
If you use it with model layer, your code becomes bound to the web interface and even the specific request method.
The Controller transforms $_POST data into a Model's object and only pass the object to Model
Not entirely sure what you meant with this. Seems you were talking about instantiation of an abstraction, which would contain the user's request. But in this case controller becomes responsible for instantiation/creation of said structure, which would violate SRP.
Closing notes:
One thing you must understand is that, in context of web based MVC applications, the User of your application is the browser. Not you. Browser sends the request, which is handled by routing mechanism and disseminated by controller. And view produces the response to your browser.
And the other thing is: Model is neither a class nor an object. Model is a layer.
Update
Generally, the same Controller handles request from a browser, a web service, an offline application, etc, or each one has it own Controller?
You should be able to have single controller, that deals with all the forms of application. But that is only on the condition, you are actually using same application for all 3 use-cases.
To do so there are two conditions:
you need to abstract the Request instance, that controller receives
the view should be instantiated outside the controller
This way you can have one application to fulfill all the requirements. Only thing, that each variant has different, is the bootstrap stage, where you create the Request instance and select the proper view.
In the situation, that you described, the changing part would actually be the view, since a REST or SOAP service would be expected to produce a different response than an ordinary web application.
Once upon a time was the three tiered application architecture.
It all depends on your MVC framework. Normally, the Controller does the link between the user and the model layer, which manipulate domain objects.
In the early days of MVC in PHP, the model layer was actually just the domain objects, called models for that purpose.
Some prefered having so called thin models, which only provide an OO representation of the data, (which simplifies persistence). In that case, the controller would regroup the so called actions, containing the bulk of the processing associated with an HTTP request (fat controller).
Others embedded most of said processing in the object model with dedicated methods (fat model).
However, at some point, you have to analyse the content of the query to sanitize and validate it, and this depends on how your view will format the request. Sanitization might be a controller task (this request should only contain these values), while validation is definitely a model task (values should be of these types).
An interesting question is: how do you deal with actions impacting several domain objects? Where do you put the logic for that?
Nowadays, the model layer is composed of services segregating the domain objects from the evil grasp of the controllers, to limit the dependencies between the layers to their respective interfaces only. This is where most of the request processing is done.
Symfony2, for instance, provides a sensible answer to this question: each step of the processing of a request is implemented in a dedicated piece of code, which could be described as the following:
the request is first turned into an object
that object is routed using a routing object
it is handled to a controller
the controller pass the request to the service concerned by the action, which build the response object
The service job is then broken in several steps:
validation (using a dedicated object which rely on rules described in a separate file),
construction/updating of domain objects (using serialization to/from db if necessary),
selection of a template for the response,
population of said template with the relevant data from the domains.
CakePHP is another popular framework which follows similar concepts: simple controllers, and services encapsulating domain objects.
See this question for a better insight on the general concepts.
See this other question for other answers.
Thanks to tereško for his invaluable input on the matter.
i am using Zend and following
the 2nd option .
Example a Registration form
step- 1 the forms sends me the post value to the specified controller
step -2 i will validate the form values for example ( mail and url and empty post values ) through server side validation .
step -3 send the checked post data either in variable or has whole to the model .
step 4- controller calls the model .
step -5 the models inserts the post values and creates a new user .
I think your second option is better regardless of framework or approah you use .
note - same controller can handle everthing depends on your application logic .
but i prefer to keep different controller for differnt user request and user types
it helps in keeping code readable managebale .
Look at some MVC frameworks.
For example, in Yii you can write such code inside action:
$model = new Model();
if(isset($_POST['Model'])) {
$model->attributes = $_POST['Model'];
}
Note, that all attributes of your model must be passed through validation rules. In Yii validation applies during (actually, before) $model->save()
See:
http://www.yiiframework.com/doc/guide/1.1/en/form.model#securing-attribute-assignments
http://www.yiiframework.com/doc/guide/1.1/en/basics.mvc
'C' is best option. You should not let raw $POST data go in model as model is supposed to be generic handling store and load operations mainly.
Example : same model can be used web interface and Web services. On Web $_POST is valid but for web services its not. So model doesnt care how data is received but only how to store and load it.
Yii is definitely a clean implementation of MVC.
So I've been studying the role of the repository pattern as a means of decoupling the persistence layer from my models in an MVC framework. Prior to this, I might have my UserModel calling active record methods directly in order to store/retrieve domain objects.
Here's a sketch of what I'm thinking in regards to the call stack in a request that should create a new User:
Here are my questions:
Is this a correct implementation of the repository pattern?
I understand that the controller should take the user's information from the request and pass it into the model. How does that usually happen? Should the controller create a User object and then pass that into the model? I sure as heck don't wanna just pass in an array of values into the model--nor do I want to pass in 15 arguments to the model method that creates a user.
In order for this pattern to really work, it looks like to me I would need to have a domain object that is just a simple data structure with no behavior and then if I'm using an ORM, I would have an ORM object which will describe how the object is persisted. Initially I resisted this because it feels like duplicate code, but if I'm really separating persistence from the business logic, this would be needed right? For example, what if I went with an in-memory store? I would no longer use the ORM object.
Am I thinking correctly here? Is this acceptable. Please help me connect the dots in my head.
1. Is this a correct implementation of the repository pattern?
I'm not sure where you been doing that research, but you have got it wrong.
Repositories as for separating the domain objects from data mappers.
There no such thing as "models". Model in MVC design pattern is one of the to main layers: presentation layer and model layer.
And the repository pattern is incompatible with active record (anti)pattern, which combines domain and storage logic in single instance, thus causing a major SRP violation.
To use a real world example for, when and how to use a repository here is an example:
You are creating some document management tool, where said documents can come from several sources (for example: local SQL database, SOAP service and cache). In this situation you create a repository, which deals with the "routing" of storage. It is the part of application, that decides which data mapper to use for storing/retrieving each document.
The goal of repository is to separate the domain logic from the interaction with storage. For the system, that was described above, a repository would also let add new data sources, without need to rewrite large amounts of code (if any). You could just add another type of mapper for the document.
2. Should the controller create a User object and then pass that into the model?
To begin with, controller itself should not create anything. Instead your controller should use a factory for acquiring instance of the object that you need. This factory can be provided to the controller through constructor or some other method. This is called: Dependency Injection (to learn more about it, watch this lecture).
Also, as noted above, model is a layer, not any specific class or object. The responsibility of controller is to alter the state of model layer (by passing data to it). You could interact with domain objects and mappers (or repositories) directly in the controller, but it would mean leaking some of the business logic in the controller. It is recommended to instead use services, which then manipulates said domain objects and storage related structures.
As for the issue with 10+ parameter, that you would require for creation of new user account, let's assume you have action with following footprint:
public function postUser( Request $request )
{
....
}
If the action gets called with specific Request instance, you have two options how to deal with large amount of parameters:
Wrap the instance in a decorator, which would let you call a single method for forming the data from request in a specific array. Then you pass this array to the service(s).
Form the array inside the controller's action and pass it, where th data is required.
The former solution is more suited for large scale applications, where such formation of data would be required repeatedly though-out the code. But in a small/medium projects the second option is the common-sense approach.
Thing is, the job of the controller is to take the user's input, and distribute it to the model layer and current view. And formation of such array fits right-in with this mandate.
3. (..) main object that is just a simple data structure with no behavior and then (..)
No. Domain object is not "simple data". It is where most of the domain business logic resides in the application.
And forget about magical ORMs. First step for implementing a repository is to separate the domain and storage logic. Domain object handles the validation and business rules, mapper deals with persistence and data integrity (small example here).
Another thing that you must realize is that repositories for web application do not really interact with in-memory persistence (apart from cache). Instead your repository would be juggling mappers for different data sources.
Should the controller create a User object and then pass that into the model?
I'm not sure what you mean by "pass that into the model" -- the User object is the model. "Controller" and "model" represent different layers in the design, they are not specific objects, and there shouldn't be a separate UserModel object as you mentioned.
The repository interface itself is generally considered part of the model, though the domain objects shouldn't be saving themselves -- this should be done in the controller.
Your controller's job would then be to interpret the request and create a User object, then use the repository to save the user:
$user = new User(...); // based on Request
$repository->save($user);
it looks like to me I would need to have a domain object that is just a simple data structure with no behavior
This is not true, you can and should encapsulate behaviour in your domain objects. As for how persistence is actually implemented, a good ORM should take care of most of the details and you shouldn't have to create additional classes by hand.
There have been a couple of discussions regarding the location of user input validation:
Should validation be done in Form objects, or the model?
Where do you do your validation? model, controller or view
These discussions were quite old, so I wanted to ask the question again to see if anyone had any fresh input. If not, I apologise in advance.
If you come from the Validation in the Model camp - does Model mean OOP representation of data (i.e. Active Record/Data Mapper) as "Entity" (to borrow the DDD terminology) - in which case you would, I assume, want all Model classes to inherit common validation constraints. Or can these rules simply be part of a Service in the Model - i.e. a Validation service? For example, could you consider Zend_Form and it's validation classes part of the Model? The concept of a Domain Model does not appear to be limited to Entities, and so validation may not necessarily need to be confined to this Entities.
It seems that you would require a lot of potentially superfluous handing of values and responses back and forth between forms and "Entities" - and in some instances you may not persist the data recieved from user input, or recieve it from user input at all.
I much prefer to put validation in the model, personally. Security considerations of course are beyond the scope of what a model should be used for, but nothing says that a model is updated in exactly one place by exactly one form. By putting type validation and sanity checking outside the model, you have to validate every time you set anything on it, which leads to copy/pasted code that's difficult to update.
I use Zend_Form as part of my models - models are creating the Zend_Form objects. I go this way because Zend_Form is not about the form rendering only; backed up with Zend_Validate and Zend_Filter it is a very powerful tool (my fav from the ZF stack). Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote a nice post about using Zend_Forms in models: http://weierophinney.net/matthew/archives/200-Using-Zend_Form-in-Your-Models.html
Data validation should be on its own, called by the controller just before committing to the model.
Haven't used PHP and haven't worked with Zend framework (have heard though), but I really like Jimmy`s blog post about validation from domain driven design perspective.
I considered many different approaches of data validation, and decided that best way of validation - it's validation before entity creation, since validation it's something which can be very dependent from context, and entity itself should not perform validation, because entity should always be in valid state.
So maybe best approach - use separate validation classes to validate data before passing it to entity constructor.
When handling user input, you should definitely handle all logic-oriented validation outside the model.
The model doesn't care about your business logic. The model doesn't care if your start date is after your end date - all the model cares about is that the date is a valid entry for that particular field in the database. It checks the data, sees a properly formatted date and moves on to the next one, because the model's entire realm of responsibility is to ensure the smooth flow of data to and from a data source.
Classes like Zend_Form are nothing more than abstractions of your view.
I recently read this post which led to a series of other posts that all seem to suggest the same idea: Models do everything, the View should be able to communicate directly with the model and vice versa all while the Controller stays out of the way. However, all of the examples shown are fairly simplistic and none really show an example of how anyone has tried to implement full handling of of a request / response cycle, which got me to wondering "should the model be responsible for handling the request (ie $_GET, $_POST, etc) itself?" and "should the controller only operate as a pass-through to instantiate the necessary model(s) and pass the model(s) to the view?". (In fact I found one example taken the extreme of embedding a Zend_Form object in the model)
From my reading of what Fowler says about MVC and just controller's in general it seems at first glance that the thinner the controller layer the better. But then I took the time to back through and study what he says about both MVC and Front Controller (which just muddies the waters because both patterns define controllers) and now my instincts suggest that Zend_Framework in implementing both of these patterns, has actually created a composite object that performs the functions of a Controller in MVC and those of a Command object in Front Controller (or some such).
So I'm wondering what the general opinions would be of others who have implemented similar patterns in their apps - do you handle the request entirely within the controller layer or do you make the model aware of the request and handle parameters directly within the model?
My first thought is to avoid handling any sort of request in the model. That is the job of the controller. Here is why: suppose you have a model that does handle your requests (GET or POST). That structure will likely work well initially. Now, suppose you want to add some sort of AJAX functionality or put up a service interface to your system. Now that you accept more than simple GET/POST, i.e. JSON or XML, your model will have to distinguish between each request type and know how to parse them. I believe that destroys a lot of simplicity and clarity of the model code. I agree that the controller layer should be thin, but it should also have a role and an expertise. For me a controllers expertise is to:
Handle incoming requests
Delivery data to the model
Request/accept data from the model
Pass the data's model to the view
I vacillate on how much the view should know about the model. Some people recommend the model go straight into the view, but I think that is fragile coupling. It frequently leads to logic in the view. Also, if you are working on a project where the team members working on the view are not as programming savvy as the main developers it puts a large burden on them to keep up with changes. I tend to package the data I hand to my views in a neutral structure instead of handing over the full models.
My interpretation of MVC is mostly pragmatic. The model's job is to model the domain you are working on and should not care where the data comes from. I frequently structure model code with the assumption that it could be used outside of the web application in perhaps a command line application or a desktop application. That sort of union rarely happens, but it leads to clear purpose of each layer. The controllers job is to move data between involved parties, be they client requests, the models, or the view. The controller should have very little domain logic, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have any code. Finally, the view should just look pretty. Hope that helps.
handling the user instructions/input (like HTTP requests) is the job of the controller. model is for working/manipulating/fetching the data and view is for showing the results to user. this means that connection between the view and the model is duty of a controller most of times.