[OT] JSF Interface Design - Is it Truly Limited?

[Mike Duffy <md...@yahoo.com>]

I know there are some leading edge JSF and Shale gurus who monitor this list.  I have a basic
question:  Can rich web application interfaces be created in JSF?

I've looked at MyFaces and Tomahawk (http://myfaces.apache.org/).  The source code that can be
found in the examples at http://www.irian.at/myfaces/home.jsf is perplexing.  I see data tables,
panel groups, and panel grids for the page layout.  I do not see standards based CSS design.  I
don't see how you could create rich web application interfaces with externalized styles using JSF
components.

I know the concept is that JSF components can be "rendered" for different viewing devices;
however, I'm not sure the creators of JSF really thought through the process of how most web
applications are created.  I think the usual case is that a mock up of the web interface is
created by marketing execs and web designers, then that mock up is "wired" by software engineers
(in our case we use Struts for the wiring).  CSS design is very advanced (see:
http://www.csszengarden.com/).  It is unrealistic to think companies are going to retrain their
web designers on a new technology that is less capable then the one they are currently using.

As a specific example, the use of such tags in JSF as, "<f:verbatim><br></f:verbatim>" is
horrible.

I think JSF has missed the mark.  Rather than tossing out Struts I think Sun should have enhanced
Struts by creating a simple process for plugging in web components (perhaps some sort of enhanced
Tiles strategy) and they should have also enhanced Struts by adding a better page flow process
(similar to Spring WebFlow).

One of the most promising projects for web application frameworks is a project named, "Clarity"
(http://www.jsfcentral.com/listings/A6020?link).  The goal of this project is to consolidate and
enhance existing frameworks.  I hope this is the path to nirvana.

I like the JSF concept of pluggable components.  My major problem with JSF is the design strategy
that states an application is a collection of components and these components have renderers for
different devices.  I suppose that you could try to wrap CSS design around "<f:view>" tags if you
are creating a web application, but this seems contrary to the JSF model.

Please share some guiding thoughts.  Especially, if you have a link to some cool example pages
created with JSF, I'd like to see them.

Thx.

Mike


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com

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

Re: [OT] JSF Interface Design - Is it Truly Limited?

[Michael Jouravlev <jm...@gmail.com>]

On 11/11/05, Mike Duffy <md...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I know the concept is that JSF components can be "rendered" for different viewing devices;
> however, I'm not sure the creators of JSF really thought through the process of how most web
> applications are created.  I think the usual case is that a mock up of the web interface is
> created by marketing execs and web designers

Who creates mockups for desktop app? For Windows, MacOS or Linux? Why
do you think things should be different for browser-based apps? Only
because webapps [still] use HTML and HTML is used by "web designers"?

>, then that mock up is "wired" by software engineers
> (in our case we use Struts for the wiring).  CSS design is very advanced (see:
> http://www.csszengarden.com/).  It is unrealistic to think companies are going to retrain their
> web designers on a new technology that is less capable then the one they are currently using.

Why an accounting app should look like an exercise in computer art?

Michael.

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

Re: [OT] JSF Interface Design - Is it Truly Limited?

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 11/11/05, Mike Duffy <md...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> I know there are some leading edge JSF and Shale gurus who monitor this
> list. I have a basic
> question: Can rich web application interfaces be created in JSF?


Sure it can. CSS based or AJAX based, or whatever you want.

But the key issue that you are raising is the design of the *components*
being used, not the architecture of the server side APIs. Just as an
example, the component set that comes with Creator 2 (
http://developer.sun.com/jscreator) is all theme sensitive, with the look
and feel driven primarily by CSS stylesheets. This was accomplished by
having the renderers emit a standard CSS style class name, without the
developer having to do anything special. You select which theme to use by
selecting one of the available theme jars, and you're done.

The main promise of a common API for building components is that folks would
start creating rich component libraries to the same API, so we (as app
developers) can choose components that meet our requirements, from more than
one source. That is already starting to happen, thanks to the fact that some
(smart :-) component developers are indeed adopting JSF, and migrating their
existing component models to support the new API as well.

Craig

Re: [OT] JSF Interface Design - Is it Truly Limited?

[Hubert Rabago <hr...@gmail.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Duffy [mailto:mduffy_lists@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 4:47 PM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: [OT] JSF Interface Design - Is it Truly Limited?
>
>
> I know there are some leading edge JSF and Shale gurus who
> monitor this list.

I would hope so too, but wouldn't you get more responses with a
JSF-specific list?  Anyway, you did send this to the Struts list, so
I'm gonna respond even though I'm not a JSF guru.

> I have a basic
> question:  Can rich web application interfaces be created in JSF?

I've seen demos, so my guess the answer is "yes".

> I've looked at MyFaces and Tomahawk
> (http://myfaces.apache.org/).  The source code that can be
> found in the examples at http://www.irian.at/myfaces/home.jsf
> is perplexing.  I see data tables, panel groups, and panel
> grids for the page layout.  I do not see standards based CSS
> design.  I don't see how you could create rich web
> application interfaces with externalized styles using JSF components.

Well, you changed the qualifiers now.  Earlier the question was just
"Can I?"  Now it's "Can I, with externalized styles?"

Anyway, JSF is a component-oriented framework, and a higher level of
abstraction than Struts.  Because of that, it's not surprising that
you lose some lower-level control.  I guess you'd just have to be
careful with which set of components you use.  Choose those that'll
give you access to the lower-level functions that matter to you.

> I know the concept is that JSF components can be "rendered"
> for different viewing devices; however, I'm not sure the
> creators of JSF really thought through the process of how
> most web applications are created.  I think the usual case is
> that a mock up of the web interface is created by marketing
> execs and web designers, then that mock up is "wired" by
> software engineers (in our case we use Struts for the
> wiring).  CSS design is very advanced (see:
> http://www.csszengarden.com/).  It is unrealistic to think
> companies are going to retrain their web designers on a new
> technology that is less capable then the one they are currently using.

I think the target was "corporate developers", but I'm not sure if
this was the target for JSF or for Creator (the IDE).  Again, I think
it's a matter of what your components allow you to do.

> As a specific example, the use of such tags in JSF as,
> "<f:verbatim><br></f:verbatim>" is horrible.

Well, it's a higher level of abstraction.  It's like, when in your
Action, you need to call getServlet().someMethod(), whereas before you
just called someMethod() directly from your servlet method.  Is this a
poor metaphor?  I think it's pretty close.  The higher the level you
go to, the farther could get from low-level things you used to take
for granted.

> Please share some guiding thoughts.  Especially, if you have
> a link to some cool example pages created with JSF, I'd like
> to see them.

I remember liking the ICEfaces demos
(http://www.icesoft.com/products/demos_icefaces.html), but it turns
out they "look" close to other JSF widgets I've seen.  Well, I tend to
think that components will allow me to control style values.  I guess
I'll have to see.  Right now though, I'm thinking innocent till proven
guilty.

> Thx.
>
> Mike

Like I said, I'm not a guru.  I'm just sharing an opinion.

Hubert

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