You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com> on 2005/08/11 18:46:58 UTC
Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
to share with you.
Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
formed!
Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
"JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
scriptaculo are in this category.
Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
flexible!
So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
approach:
1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
the Ajax world after its release? :-)
2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
Let's discuss. :-)
--
Best Regards,
Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com>.
Ops. I was out for days and late for this response.
I must follow up this thread because I didn't mean "all I want". I
think those are quite generic type and we can replace different
ajax/javascript framework easily. :)
On 8/13/05, Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry about spamming the list again, but after reading your first
> email I'm beginning to think that all you want are RPX ajax calls?
>
> If so I will add this in this weekend, I can't imagine it would take
> more than an hour or two. AjaxCallEngine service accepts call -> Looks
> up appropriate service via hivemind -> calls method on said service
> and returns the result....
>
> jesse
> On 8/12/05, Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem
> > too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides
> > just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing
> > the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
> >
> > On 8/12/05, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> > > Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might
> > > want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list.
> > >
> > > Jamie
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote:
> > >
> > > > Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
> > > > attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
> > > > looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
> > > > to share with you.
> > > >
> > > > Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
> > > > example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
> > > > Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
> > > > formed!
> > > >
> > > > Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
> > > > full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
> > > > "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
> > > > are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
> > > > compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
> > > > auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
> > > > them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
> > > > and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
> > > >
> > > > Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
> > > > scriptaculo are in this category.
> > > >
> > > > Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
> > > > Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
> > > > stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
> > > > XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
> > > > backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
> > > > to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
> > > > Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
> > > > adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
> > > > Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
> > > > flexible!
> > > >
> > > > So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
> > > > framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
> > > > webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
> > > > application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
> > > > these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
> > > > approach:
> > > >
> > > > 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
> > > > can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
> > > > if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
> > > > the Ajax world after its release? :-)
> > > >
> > > > 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
> > > > ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
> > > > instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
> > > >
> > > > My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
> > > > instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
> > > > are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
> > > >
> > > > Let's discuss. :-)
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>.
Sorry about spamming the list again, but after reading your first
email I'm beginning to think that all you want are RPX ajax calls?
If so I will add this in this weekend, I can't imagine it would take
more than an hour or two. AjaxCallEngine service accepts call -> Looks
up appropriate service via hivemind -> calls method on said service
and returns the result....
jesse
On 8/12/05, Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem
> too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides
> just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing
> the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
>
> On 8/12/05, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> > Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might
> > want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list.
> >
> > Jamie
> >
> >
> > On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote:
> >
> > > Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
> > > attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
> > > looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
> > > to share with you.
> > >
> > > Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
> > > example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
> > > Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
> > > formed!
> > >
> > > Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
> > > full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
> > > "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
> > > are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
> > > compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
> > > auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
> > > them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
> > > and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
> > >
> > > Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
> > > scriptaculo are in this category.
> > >
> > > Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
> > > Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
> > > stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
> > > XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
> > > backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
> > > to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
> > > Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
> > > adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
> > > Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
> > > flexible!
> > >
> > > So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
> > > framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
> > > webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
> > > application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
> > > these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
> > > approach:
> > >
> > > 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
> > > can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
> > > if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
> > > the Ajax world after its release? :-)
> > >
> > > 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
> > > ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
> > > instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
> > >
> > > My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
> > > instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
> > > are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
> > >
> > > Let's discuss. :-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>.
I would also add in that these building blocks, when re-written should
be more than enough of a foundation for any library to use together
with tapestry. I see them all as being very interchangeable.
The major piece of the framework that I think you have in question is
the engine service on tapestry's end that handles ajax requests as
well as the interactions between that service and the rest of the
tapestry framework. With this alone it should be relatively easy for
anyone to plug-in whichever JS library they want as well as most
anything else...Isn't that why hivemind/aop is so great?
I can't speak on Viktor's behalf, but if what we (you?) come up with
over the next couple weeks seems like a good foundation there's
absolutely no reason why someone couldn't submit it as a patch to
tapestry to avoid forcing other component libraries to have to mix in
a tacos engine jar. (I'm hoping we can seperate this part of tacos a
little bit into a sort of "core ajax" release for this specific
reason). There are also plans to provide ajax request logic to more
than just components, like actual service calls on hivemind
services/etc...This should all be relatively straightforward from what
I've read so far.
I know I don't care who implements what, but I don't see anyone else
building a real foundation as of yet so we are pursuing it ourselves.
If you really do feel this strongly about it then we could definitely
use your help in tacos, even if you don't ever actually use a tacos
componenet ;)
jesse
On 8/12/05, Viktor Szathmary <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/12/05, Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem
> > too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides
> > just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing
> > the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
>
> At this point Tacos is trying to provide some building blocks that fit
> well into the Tapestry rendering lifecycle but utilize ajax. With
> RPC-ish ajax frameworks, there's very little in tapestry that you
> would leverage (ie. none of the templating and callback mechanisms).
> That said, there are plans to port the current javascript to
> prototype.js - with that we can also leverage some eyecandy from
> scriptaculous and rico... Also, there's another release coming up
> shortly with further ajaxified components (such as a PartialTree)...
>
>
> regards,
> viktor
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Viktor Szathmary <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 8/12/05, Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem
> too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides
> just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing
> the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
At this point Tacos is trying to provide some building blocks that fit
well into the Tapestry rendering lifecycle but utilize ajax. With
RPC-ish ajax frameworks, there's very little in tapestry that you
would leverage (ie. none of the templating and callback mechanisms).
That said, there are plans to port the current javascript to
prototype.js - with that we can also leverage some eyecandy from
scriptaculous and rico... Also, there's another release coming up
shortly with further ajaxified components (such as a PartialTree)...
regards,
viktor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Alex Ieong <xe...@gmail.com>.
Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem
too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides
just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing
the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
On 8/12/05, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might
> want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list.
>
> Jamie
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote:
>
> > Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
> > attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
> > looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
> > to share with you.
> >
> > Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
> > example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
> > Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
> > formed!
> >
> > Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
> > full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
> > "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
> > are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
> > compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
> > auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
> > them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
> > and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
> >
> > Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
> > scriptaculo are in this category.
> >
> > Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
> > Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
> > stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
> > XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
> > backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
> > to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
> > Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
> > adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
> > Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
> > flexible!
> >
> > So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
> > framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
> > webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
> > application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
> > these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
> > approach:
> >
> > 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
> > can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
> > if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
> > the Ajax world after its release? :-)
> >
> > 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
> > ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
> > instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
> >
> > My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
> > instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
> > are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
> >
> > Let's discuss. :-)
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>.
Yes, let's discuss. We're currently in the planning/implementation
phase of providing a base framework for ajax integration with
tapestry, which will be seperate from the actual tacos components...Ie
it is hoped that this might be a setup that any library can use....
I'm sort of caught in the middle of getting our current release out
right now, but we're always open for discussion. The more
input/contributors to any aspect (requirements/implementation/etc..)
the better imho..
jesse
On 8/11/05, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might
> want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list.
>
> Jamie
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote:
>
> > Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
> > attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
> > looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
> > to share with you.
> >
> > Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
> > example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
> > Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
> > formed!
> >
> > Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
> > full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
> > "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
> > are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
> > compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
> > auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
> > them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
> > and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
> >
> > Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
> > scriptaculo are in this category.
> >
> > Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
> > Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
> > stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
> > XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
> > backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
> > to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
> > Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
> > adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
> > Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
> > flexible!
> >
> > So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
> > framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
> > webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
> > application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
> > these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
> > approach:
> >
> > 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
> > can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
> > if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
> > the Ajax world after its release? :-)
> >
> > 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
> > ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
> > instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
> >
> > My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
> > instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
> > are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
> >
> > Let's discuss. :-)
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Thoughts about Ajax and Tap.(or other webapp frameworks)
Posted by Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>.
Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might
want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list.
Jamie
On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote:
> Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some
> attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am
> looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like
> to share with you.
>
> Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for
> example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET,
> Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already
> formed!
>
> Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and
> full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the
> "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks
> are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those
> compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example,
> auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without
> them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly
> and work fine with all kind of backend technology.
>
> Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and
> scriptaculo are in this category.
>
> Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and
> Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend
> stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML /
> XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some
> backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you
> to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet.
> Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by
> adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or
> Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and
> flexible!
>
> So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation
> framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to
> webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web
> application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with
> these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful
> approach:
>
> 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We
> can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework -
> if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule
> the Ajax world after its release? :-)
>
> 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here
> ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention
> instead of using Axis / JWSDP?
>
> My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official
> instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We
> are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we?
>
> Let's discuss. :-)
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org