JSF and Tapestry

["Bolinger, Gregg D" <Gr...@intrustbank.com>]

So there are always a lot of talks of Struts vs every other framework
known to man.  I wondered if anyone would care to shed some light on
some of the advantages Tapestry has over JSF.  I am currently using JSF
in a project but am considering moving it over to Tapestry.  Give me a
good reason. :-)  If this is not the right place to be asking these
kinds of questions feel free to let me know.  I don't want to clutter
the mailing list up with nonsense.

 

Thanks.

 

Gregg Bolinger

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>]

On Tue,  4 Jan 2005 20:15:55 +0100, Markus Eberle
<Ma...@tngtech.com> wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> [...]
> 
> >   9. Absolutely impossible to pollute your HTML template with any code.
> 
> except ognl, which is also code

If this bothers you, put the OGNL code into the page/component specification.

Tapestry gives you the option, unlike JSF & JSPs.

> 
> >   8. HTML templates remain valid HTML files that can be edited by HTML
> > people.
> 
> The templates are mostly not valid HTML (atleast not _strict_ HTML) as you put
> in foreign attributes, which are not part of HTML.

3.1 should  address this, by supporting namespaces or other mechanisms
to use a valid attribute, rather than jwcid.

> 
> Cheers,
>     Markus
> 
> 
-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind

Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com

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

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[kranga <kr...@k2d2.org>]

I think a more interesting comparison that the Tapestry community should
shoot for is with .NET. If you look at the ASP.NET component market
(infragistics.com, componentone.com, componentsource.com) you will see that
it is very vibrant and lucrative and the web components available are
amazing and staggering in their complexity and functionality. How do people
entrenched in Tapestry compare it with asp.net? I've worked extensively with
asp.net and feel
- asp.net has a much easier learning curve
- Great integration with visual studio.net makes a big difference

Personally, for me, the source of frustration with Tapestry is lack of
up-to-date and in-depth documentation. Howard's book (nothing personal here)
has a lot of "filler" material and could have been replaced with much better
information. That said, however, I do feel Tapestry is the best paradigm for
web development available on the Java platform. I never liked Struts, and am
glad for Tapestry and would like to see (and donate) more sophisticated
components...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vince Marco" <vm...@mac.com>
To: "Tapestry users" <ta...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: JSF and Tapestry


> >
> >>   9. Absolutely impossible to pollute your HTML template with any
> >> code.
> >
> > except ognl, which is also code
> >
>
> That's why I always put my OGNL in templates, not in the HTML template.
>   With Tapestry this is a choice that you make, but it's at least one
> you can make.
>
>
> >>   8. HTML templates remain valid HTML files that can be edited by HTML
> >> people.
> >
> > The templates are mostly not valid HTML (atleast not _strict_ HTML) as
> > you put
> > in foreign attributes, which are not part of HTML.
>
> I think the point here is that it is valid HTML to most browsers and
> HTML editors.
>
> Your distinctions are worth noting.  Many times we just push code
> around from one place or language into another.  Much of the hype of
> pushing configuration into complex XML will probably have a backlash.
> However, Tapestry at least provides the tools and flexibility to have
> some choices in this management to accomodate both maintainability and
> rapid development.
>
> Going back to the original question, I find the values of Tapestry to
> be:
> 1) Excellent error handling
> 2) Editable HTML
> 3) Ability to separate behavior from template
> 4) Page and component paradigm for webapps
>
> To my knowledge, JSF cannot extend control over error handling in JSPs
> so as long as you are  using JSP views, JSF will suffer.  JSF does
> allow components, but I have no experience with them yet.  As far as
> the MVC paradigm, I like the promise of JSF but it appears to be
> currently far short of what Tapestry provides now.
>
> Tapestry's biggest weakness (IMHO) is that it has no portal
> compatibility.  Those are a growing percentage of my projects that I
> cannot choose Tapestry for.  I'd be pushing a JSR-168 engine and
> compatibility way up in priority for Tapestry.
>
> Vince
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[Vince Marco <vm...@mac.com>]

Yikes, did I say that?!?  I meant I put OGNL in my config XMLs.  :-)

Vince

On Jan 4, 2005, at 2:08 PM, Vince Marco wrote:

> That's why I always put my OGNL in templates, not in the HTML 
> template.  With Tapestry this is a choice that you make, but it's at 
> least one you can make.


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

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[Vince Marco <vm...@mac.com>]

>
>>   9. Absolutely impossible to pollute your HTML template with any 
>> code.
>
> except ognl, which is also code
>

That's why I always put my OGNL in templates, not in the HTML template. 
  With Tapestry this is a choice that you make, but it's at least one 
you can make.


>>   8. HTML templates remain valid HTML files that can be edited by HTML
>> people.
>
> The templates are mostly not valid HTML (atleast not _strict_ HTML) as 
> you put
> in foreign attributes, which are not part of HTML.

I think the point here is that it is valid HTML to most browsers and 
HTML editors.

Your distinctions are worth noting.  Many times we just push code 
around from one place or language into another.  Much of the hype of 
pushing configuration into complex XML will probably have a backlash.  
However, Tapestry at least provides the tools and flexibility to have 
some choices in this management to accomodate both maintainability and 
rapid development.

Going back to the original question, I find the values of Tapestry to 
be:
	1) Excellent error handling
	2) Editable HTML
	3) Ability to separate behavior from template
	4) Page and component paradigm for webapps

To my knowledge, JSF cannot extend control over error handling in JSPs 
so as long as you are  using JSP views, JSF will suffer.  JSF does 
allow components, but I have no experience with them yet.  As far as 
the MVC paradigm, I like the promise of JSF but it appears to be 
currently far short of what Tapestry provides now.

Tapestry's biggest weakness (IMHO) is that it has no portal 
compatibility.  Those are a growing percentage of my projects that I 
cannot choose Tapestry for.  I'd be pushing a JSR-168 engine and 
compatibility way up in priority for Tapestry.

Vince
  


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

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[Markus Eberle <Ma...@tngtech.com>]

Hi there,

[...]

>   9. Absolutely impossible to pollute your HTML template with any code.

except ognl, which is also code

>   8. HTML templates remain valid HTML files that can be edited by HTML
> people.

The templates are mostly not valid HTML (atleast not _strict_ HTML) as you put
in foreign attributes, which are not part of HTML.

Cheers,
    Markus


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

Re: JSF and Tapestry

[Andrew Arrow <an...@verizon.net>]

Top Ten Things I Like About Tapestry vs. JSP/JSF

10. Makes creating good MVC designs the path of least resistance.
  9. Absolutely impossible to pollute your HTML template with any code.
  8. HTML templates remain valid HTML files that can be edited by HTML people.
  7. Never spend any time making urls with ?var1=fred&var2=barney&var3=456
  6. Variables passed by URLS maintain object types (String, Integer, etc.)
  5. Built in object pooling for easy scaling.
  4. Easy to keep your session objects small.
  3. Rich set of custom components (tables with sorting, paging, etc.)
  2. Real world web application needs met (tricky javascript not a problem).
  1. One word: ognl  (www.ognl.org)


Bolinger, Gregg D wrote:
> So there are always a lot of talks of Struts vs every other framework
> known to man.  I wondered if anyone would care to shed some light on
> some of the advantages Tapestry has over JSF.  I am currently using JSF
> in a project but am considering moving it over to Tapestry.  Give me a
> good reason. :-)  If this is not the right place to be asking these
> kinds of questions feel free to let me know.  I don't want to clutter
> the mailing list up with nonsense.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>  
> 
> Gregg Bolinger
> 
> 



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