Thinking ahead to RiA->SOA based applications and Tapestry

[Daniel Honig <da...@gmail.com>]

I'm seeing that the buzzword architecture of the year is going to be RiA 
-> SOA.  With frameworks like Echo, Laszlo and others emerging perhaps 
2005 could be the year when we get to see a revolution in the client 
side.  To me web interaces are slow moving in progress and using the web 
is largely the same experiences it was 3-4 years ago.   So I was 
thinking about how well the Tapestry programming model fits in with 
these frameworks.  They are component based and so is Tapestry so I 
would expect a 1 to 1 mapping.  With this in mind if someone wanted to 
start a project to add support for one of these frameworks you should be 
able to do so in much the same way that the HTML components integrated.  
These would just be additional component libraries that one could choose 
from. Is this currently  thought of in the future directions of Tapestry?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Thinking ahead to RiA->SOA based applications and Tapestry

[Warner Onstine <sw...@warneronstine.com>]

I'm (slowly) moving in this direction, or at least seeing what can be 
done integration-wise. There was quite a bit of debate on the list as 
to whether this is something that actually *should* be done. If you 
search the archives you'll see the flurry of messages.

-warner

On Jan 20, 2005, at 9:52 PM, Daniel Honig wrote:

> I'm seeing that the buzzword architecture of the year is going to be 
> RiA -> SOA.  With frameworks like Echo, Laszlo and others emerging 
> perhaps 2005 could be the year when we get to see a revolution in the 
> client side.  To me web interaces are slow moving in progress and 
> using the web is largely the same experiences it was 3-4 years ago.   
> So I was thinking about how well the Tapestry programming model fits 
> in with these frameworks.  They are component based and so is Tapestry 
> so I would expect a 1 to 1 mapping.  With this in mind if someone 
> wanted to start a project to add support for one of these frameworks 
> you should be able to do so in much the same way that the HTML 
> components integrated.  These would just be additional component 
> libraries that one could choose from. Is this currently  thought of in 
> the future directions of Tapestry?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org