You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by abangkis <ab...@sadikungroup.com> on 2004/10/05 17:55:26 UTC
loading image in for each
Hello,
i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it into
a list and i'm trying
to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to do that ?
because i previously load an image using Image component, and i cant
change the path
in for each dinamically.
TIA
Abangkis P
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: loading image in for each
Posted by abangkis <ab...@sadikungroup.com>.
hello paul, sorry for the inconvinience..
I tried to implement the custom service following the chart service in
the workbench example.
But it didn't work. Maybe its because i'm still new with tapestry. So i
was wondering if you
can give me a clue or example in creating the custom service that return
the url from my
list of picture.
TIA
Abangkis
Paul Ferraro wrote:
> Storing the images in a protected directory on your web server is
> definitely a faster method of serving them, although database is often
> easier if images are added/updated/removed with any regularity.
> If you're storing the images in the database, you'll want to write a
> custom IEngineService that either fetches an image from the database
> and streams it back to the client.
> If you are using the file path approach, you'll need to set up the
> appropriate security constraints in your web.xml. You then have the
> option of using J2EE security roles to grant access to the images, or
> creating a custom IEngineService that handles the authorization and
> streaming. If you choose the custom service approach, your service
> would simply fetch the path (relative to the servlet context path)
> from the database and forward the request to that path (request
> forwarding conveniently bypasses any security constraints contained in
> your web.xml).
>
> If you've gone with a custom service approach, within your Foreach,
> use the following to generate the img tag to point to utilize your
> service:
>
> <img jwcid="@Any" src="ognl:imageURL"/>
>
> public String getImageURL()
> {
> IEngineService service =
> this.getPage().getEngine().getService("YourServiceName");
> ILink link = service.getLink(this.getPage().getRequestCycle(),
> this, new Object[] { serviceParameter1, serviceParameter2 });
> return link.getURL();
> }
>
> Paul
>
> abangkis wrote:
>
>> it contains the image full path at the server, i want it to accessed
>> only through my application.
>> I'm considering saving the image in the database. But that can make
>> the database extremely
>> large in size. Maybe you can give me some perspective about this two
>> option.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Abangkis P
>>
>> Paul Ferraro wrote:
>>
>>> Does this list of images from the database contain the image urls?
>>> or the images themselves?
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> abangkis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it
>>>> into a list and i'm trying
>>>> to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to
>>>> do that ?
>>>> because i previously load an image using Image component, and i
>>>> cant change the path
>>>> in for each dinamically.
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>> Abangkis P
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Warner Onstine <sw...@warneronstine.com>.
If we are talking about having Tapestry create the XML document that
Laszlo uses to generate it's components from I agree that would be very
cool. In fact I have been thinking quite a bit about using a RIA for my
new projects and this would be perfect for that solution.
I'm also assuming it would be possible to tell Tapestry to render one
page type over another through some kind of switching mechanism, so
that I could write one page that has all of my components and it would
either render HTML or go through Laszlo.
Anyone done work with Lazslo yet?
-warner
On Oct 7, 2004, at 11:47 AM, kdorff@kcp.com wrote:
> I will concur that this would be great. I saw the Laszlow demos today
> for
> the first time and all I can say is WOW. I would love to see this
> become
> the norm on web sites like Amazon and Ebay.
>
> Kevin
>
> --
> Kevin C. Dorff
> IT Systems Engineer, Staff
> National Nuclear Security Administrations Kirtland Operations
> Operated by Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies, LLC
> Phone: 505-844-3785
> Fax: 505-844-3326
> www.kcp.com
>
>
>
> Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
> 10/07/2004 12:02 PM
> Please respond to
> "Tapestry users" <ta...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
> To
> Tapestry users <ta...@jakarta.apache.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
>
>
>
>
>
>
> These run along my thoughts ... Lazlo as super-components, and use of
> Tapestry instead of servlet & JSP to communicate between the Lazlo app
> and the server. Tapestry is, I think, well situated to do all of this.
>
>
> On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 11:48:36 -0400, Eli Doran <el...@elidoran.com> wrote:
>>
>> I assume at least some of you have seen that Lazlo has released its
>> rich
>> application client framework as open source to compete with Macromedia
>> Flex. It uses its own XML markup to create the user interface and
>> communicate data. I was wondering if any of you had comments on
>> integrating this with Tapestry. It seems that the rather amazing
>> extensibility of Tapestry would allow XML templates for the UI and
>> services that easily render the necessary XML for data requests. I
>> included the link below for the TSS thread. Someone did mention using
>> Tapestry as well. I think Tapestry would work wonders above any
>> alternatives they have discussed.
>>
>> There is a post on Howard's blog a while back mentioning how nice it
>> would be to use Flex and Tapestry together (I seem to remember it but
>> have not checked recently). Does Lazlo's product seem an equally
>> enticing combination?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> the curious,
>> Eli Doran
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=29237#141412
>> http://www.laszlosystems.com/products/
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by kd...@kcp.com.
I will concur that this would be great. I saw the Laszlow demos today for
the first time and all I can say is WOW. I would love to see this become
the norm on web sites like Amazon and Ebay.
Kevin
--
Kevin C. Dorff
IT Systems Engineer, Staff
National Nuclear Security Administrations Kirtland Operations
Operated by Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies, LLC
Phone: 505-844-3785
Fax: 505-844-3326
www.kcp.com
Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>
10/07/2004 12:02 PM
Please respond to
"Tapestry users" <ta...@jakarta.apache.org>
To
Tapestry users <ta...@jakarta.apache.org>
cc
Subject
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
These run along my thoughts ... Lazlo as super-components, and use of
Tapestry instead of servlet & JSP to communicate between the Lazlo app
and the server. Tapestry is, I think, well situated to do all of this.
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 11:48:36 -0400, Eli Doran <el...@elidoran.com> wrote:
>
> I assume at least some of you have seen that Lazlo has released its rich
> application client framework as open source to compete with Macromedia
> Flex. It uses its own XML markup to create the user interface and
> communicate data. I was wondering if any of you had comments on
> integrating this with Tapestry. It seems that the rather amazing
> extensibility of Tapestry would allow XML templates for the UI and
> services that easily render the necessary XML for data requests. I
> included the link below for the TSS thread. Someone did mention using
> Tapestry as well. I think Tapestry would work wonders above any
> alternatives they have discussed.
>
> There is a post on Howard's blog a while back mentioning how nice it
> would be to use Flex and Tapestry together (I seem to remember it but
> have not checked recently). Does Lazlo's product seem an equally
> enticing combination?
>
> Thank you,
> the curious,
> Eli Doran
>
> See:
>
> http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=29237#141412
> http://www.laszlosystems.com/products/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Matt Welch <Ma...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:35:37 -0700 (PDT), Jonny Wray
<jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I (and I'm sure others) feel like I'm shoehorning my application
> development into the web paradigm that was not designed for it.
> Ideally, I'd use a thick client but that comes with the usual
> client/JVM install problems, and so we use a html/web paradigm which
> works but is far from ideal. To me the RIA approach seems to provide a
> good intermediate solution. No client install problems (simple plugin
> into a browser) but with the power of standalone application
> development.
I couldn't agree with you more. I'm currently working on a project
that can essentially be broken down into two sides: 1) a widely used
"consumer" side that works fine within the limitations of a
HTML/Browser based client, and 2) and administrative/content
development side which is a nightmare to shoehorn (to borrow your
phrase) into an HTML based client. It would be much better suited to a
RIA approach, but unfortunately, client demands prevent that option.
My problem with the Laszlo demos I saw was that they don't actually
work like a standard thick client would be expected to. Everything
from navigation to controls were a little wonky. Even things as simple
as the mouse pointer remaining in "link" form (i.e. the finger) when
trying to control the flash based scroll bars felt... off.
The Flex demos are almost as bad. They choose to use slider controls
to do certain things things (like specify price ranges) not because
that's the best way to do it, but instead because it allows the
application developers to show off Flash's ability to dynamically make
things transparent.
Perhaps Laszlo and Flex could both be decent RIA candidates if they
were being demonstrated by normal application developers and not Flash
"artists". They should take a cue from Thinlets
(http://www.thinlet.com).
-Matt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Joe Andolina <jo...@andomation.com>.
Are you guys kidding me?
Having made several Tapestry apps and been totally limited by the
"usual" html boundaries (no fault of tapestry). The use of flex or Laszlo is
amazing. I know the two systems don't follow the amazing data collection and
presentation "magic" of tapestry but the user experience is much much more
compelling. I love the tapestry page / component architecture and am blown
away by the for loops and the automatic data collection. Aside from that, I
would much rather build am app that pings the server for the bits of data it
needs in lieu of reloading the entire page just to populate some data
element.
For the record I am a huge fan of tapestry, but I feel a little left
out when it comes to the user experience. Tapestry and HTML make web
applications. Flex and Laszlo make applications that get data from the web.
I know this turns our request / response model on its ear, but the end
result is much cleaner.
Sorry for the flame, its just how I feel,
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Alex [mailto:alex.guan@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 7:05 PM
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
I don't like the Flash approach either. Maybe the Gmail approach is a
better way. Using the JavaScript and DHTML as the pure rendering
layer and use the XmlHttpObject to talk with the the server.
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:01:54 -0400, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>
wrote:
> I agree with you completely. At Darden we looked at both Swing and
> Flash-based solutions for our admin tools (we make business school
> software for admissions, career development, registrar, and alumni
> affairs). We went for the Swing-based solution partly because we didn't
> want to be stuck with Macromedia and partly because there was more
> developer momentum behind it. LZX is certainly interesting for those
> sorts of apps.
>
> Jamie
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 7:49 PM, Warner Onstine wrote:
>
> > The two apps I was talking about would both be management applications
> > where you can (to a certain degree) control what the browser is. I
> > also would like to come up with a rich client (ala swing) that would
> > have the same functionality but be more stateful.
> >
> > If we can figure out a good architecture for using Tapestry with
> > Laszlo I would be very pleased as it would again reduce the amount of
> > time I need to spend developing.
> >
> > There are a lot of webapps that don't make sense as webapps, I think
> > we all agree on that, the key is, as always, how do we make things
> > more usable. I agree that there is a lot of bad flash out there, but
> > let's not condemn the platform for what some graphic artists/ersatz
> > web developers attempt to do with it.
> >
> > -warner
> >
> > On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:12 PM, David Teare wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
> >> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
> >>
> >> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
> >> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML
> >> once Longhorn ships.
> >>
> >> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
> >> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
> >> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired
> >> of clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
> >>
> >> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
> >> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> --Dave.
> >>
> >> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
> >>> circumstances for a specific audience, for example administrators
> >>> dealing with lots of db interactions where a more stateful app is
> >>> desirable.
> >>>
> >>> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
> >>> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
> >>> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
> >>> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
> >>> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
> >>> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
> >>> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
> >>> CMD-C command to copy text!
> >>>
> >>> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that
> >>> all have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
> >>> search, that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
> >>>
> >>> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
> >>>
> >>> Jamie
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
> >>>> if someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
> >>>> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
> >>>> gives you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that
> >>>> apps can allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read
> >>>> the edit-preferences page!).
> >>>> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
> >>>> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will
> >>>> scale up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include
> >>>> other .lzx into parent pages is nice).
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in
> >>>> my mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and
> >>>> Java. The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS
> >>>> can find a way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows
> >>>> user's to customize the font size, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just my $0.02.
> >>>>
> >>>> --Dave.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 on that!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jamie
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
> >>>>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of
> >>>>>> non-standard
> >>>>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
> >>>>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
> >>>>>> Applications
> >>>>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
> >>>>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
> >>>>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that
> >>>>>> were
> >>>>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me
> >>>>>> back to
> >>>>>> the HTML frames model of old.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet"
> >>>>>> types
> >>>>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked
> >>>>>> quite
> >>>>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't
> >>>>>> need our
> >>>>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI
> >>>>>> controls
> >>>>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Matt
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> -
> >>>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
> >> David Teare - IT Consultant
> >> Teare Software Solutions Inc.
> >> (416) 505-1374
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Alex <al...@gmail.com>.
I don't like the Flash approach either. Maybe the Gmail approach is a
better way. Using the JavaScript and DHTML as the pure rendering
layer and use the XmlHttpObject to talk with the the server.
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 20:01:54 -0400, Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> I agree with you completely. At Darden we looked at both Swing and
> Flash-based solutions for our admin tools (we make business school
> software for admissions, career development, registrar, and alumni
> affairs). We went for the Swing-based solution partly because we didn't
> want to be stuck with Macromedia and partly because there was more
> developer momentum behind it. LZX is certainly interesting for those
> sorts of apps.
>
> Jamie
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 7:49 PM, Warner Onstine wrote:
>
> > The two apps I was talking about would both be management applications
> > where you can (to a certain degree) control what the browser is. I
> > also would like to come up with a rich client (ala swing) that would
> > have the same functionality but be more stateful.
> >
> > If we can figure out a good architecture for using Tapestry with
> > Laszlo I would be very pleased as it would again reduce the amount of
> > time I need to spend developing.
> >
> > There are a lot of webapps that don't make sense as webapps, I think
> > we all agree on that, the key is, as always, how do we make things
> > more usable. I agree that there is a lot of bad flash out there, but
> > let's not condemn the platform for what some graphic artists/ersatz
> > web developers attempt to do with it.
> >
> > -warner
> >
> > On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:12 PM, David Teare wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
> >> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
> >>
> >> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
> >> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML
> >> once Longhorn ships.
> >>
> >> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
> >> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
> >> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired
> >> of clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
> >>
> >> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
> >> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> --Dave.
> >>
> >> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
> >>> circumstances for a specific audience, for example administrators
> >>> dealing with lots of db interactions where a more stateful app is
> >>> desirable.
> >>>
> >>> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
> >>> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
> >>> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
> >>> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
> >>> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
> >>> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
> >>> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
> >>> CMD-C command to copy text!
> >>>
> >>> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that
> >>> all have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
> >>> search, that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
> >>>
> >>> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
> >>>
> >>> Jamie
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
> >>>> if someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
> >>>>
> >>>> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
> >>>> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
> >>>> gives you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that
> >>>> apps can allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read
> >>>> the edit-preferences page!).
> >>>> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
> >>>> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will
> >>>> scale up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include
> >>>> other .lzx into parent pages is nice).
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in
> >>>> my mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and
> >>>> Java. The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS
> >>>> can find a way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows
> >>>> user's to customize the font size, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just my $0.02.
> >>>>
> >>>> --Dave.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 on that!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jamie
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
> >>>>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of
> >>>>>> non-standard
> >>>>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
> >>>>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
> >>>>>> Applications
> >>>>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
> >>>>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
> >>>>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that
> >>>>>> were
> >>>>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me
> >>>>>> back to
> >>>>>> the HTML frames model of old.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet"
> >>>>>> types
> >>>>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked
> >>>>>> quite
> >>>>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't
> >>>>>> need our
> >>>>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI
> >>>>>> controls
> >>>>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Matt
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> -
> >>>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --
> >> Cheers,
> >> David Teare - IT Consultant
> >> Teare Software Solutions Inc.
> >> (416) 505-1374
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>.
I agree with you completely. At Darden we looked at both Swing and
Flash-based solutions for our admin tools (we make business school
software for admissions, career development, registrar, and alumni
affairs). We went for the Swing-based solution partly because we didn't
want to be stuck with Macromedia and partly because there was more
developer momentum behind it. LZX is certainly interesting for those
sorts of apps.
Jamie
On Oct 8, 2004, at 7:49 PM, Warner Onstine wrote:
> The two apps I was talking about would both be management applications
> where you can (to a certain degree) control what the browser is. I
> also would like to come up with a rich client (ala swing) that would
> have the same functionality but be more stateful.
>
> If we can figure out a good architecture for using Tapestry with
> Laszlo I would be very pleased as it would again reduce the amount of
> time I need to spend developing.
>
> There are a lot of webapps that don't make sense as webapps, I think
> we all agree on that, the key is, as always, how do we make things
> more usable. I agree that there is a lot of bad flash out there, but
> let's not condemn the platform for what some graphic artists/ersatz
> web developers attempt to do with it.
>
> -warner
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:12 PM, David Teare wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
>> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
>>
>> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
>> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML
>> once Longhorn ships.
>>
>> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
>> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
>> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired
>> of clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
>>
>> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
>> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --Dave.
>>
>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>>
>>> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
>>> circumstances for a specific audience, for example administrators
>>> dealing with lots of db interactions where a more stateful app is
>>> desirable.
>>>
>>> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
>>> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
>>> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
>>> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
>>> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
>>> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
>>> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
>>> CMD-C command to copy text!
>>>
>>> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that
>>> all have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
>>> search, that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
>>>
>>> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
>>>
>>> Jamie
>>>
>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
>>>> if someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
>>>>
>>>> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
>>>> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
>>>> gives you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that
>>>> apps can allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read
>>>> the edit-preferences page!).
>>>> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
>>>> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will
>>>> scale up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include
>>>> other .lzx into parent pages is nice).
>>>>
>>>> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in
>>>> my mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and
>>>> Java. The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS
>>>> can find a way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows
>>>> user's to customize the font size, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Just my $0.02.
>>>>
>>>> --Dave.
>>>>
>>>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 on that!
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamie
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>>>>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of
>>>>>> non-standard
>>>>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>>>>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
>>>>>> Applications
>>>>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>>>>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>>>>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me
>>>>>> back to
>>>>>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet"
>>>>>> types
>>>>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked
>>>>>> quite
>>>>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't
>>>>>> need our
>>>>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI
>>>>>> controls
>>>>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> David Teare - IT Consultant
>> Teare Software Solutions Inc.
>> (416) 505-1374
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Warner Onstine <sw...@warneronstine.com>.
The two apps I was talking about would both be management applications
where you can (to a certain degree) control what the browser is. I also
would like to come up with a rich client (ala swing) that would have
the same functionality but be more stateful.
If we can figure out a good architecture for using Tapestry with Laszlo
I would be very pleased as it would again reduce the amount of time I
need to spend developing.
There are a lot of webapps that don't make sense as webapps, I think we
all agree on that, the key is, as always, how do we make things more
usable. I agree that there is a lot of bad flash out there, but let's
not condemn the platform for what some graphic artists/ersatz web
developers attempt to do with it.
-warner
On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:12 PM, David Teare wrote:
> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
>
> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML
> once Longhorn ships.
>
> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired of
> clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
>
> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --Dave.
>
> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>
>> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
>> circumstances for a specific audience, for example administrators
>> dealing with lots of db interactions where a more stateful app is
>> desirable.
>>
>> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
>> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
>> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
>> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
>> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
>> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
>> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
>> CMD-C command to copy text!
>>
>> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that
>> all have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
>> search, that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
>>
>> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
>>
>> Jamie
>>
>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
>>
>>> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
>>> if someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
>>>
>>> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
>>> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
>>> gives you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that
>>> apps can allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read the
>>> edit-preferences page!).
>>> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
>>> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will scale
>>> up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include other
>>> .lzx into parent pages is nice).
>>>
>>> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in
>>> my mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and
>>> Java. The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS can
>>> find a way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows
>>> user's to customize the font size, etc.
>>>
>>> Just my $0.02.
>>>
>>> --Dave.
>>>
>>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 on that!
>>>>
>>>> Jamie
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>>>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>>>>
>>>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of
>>>>> non-standard
>>>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult
>>>>> to
>>>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>>>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
>>>>> Applications
>>>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>>>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>>>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
>>>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back
>>>>> to
>>>>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet"
>>>>> types
>>>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by
>>>>> the
>>>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked
>>>>> quite
>>>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need
>>>>> our
>>>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI
>>>>> controls
>>>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matt
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> Cheers,
> David Teare - IT Consultant
> Teare Software Solutions Inc.
> (416) 505-1374
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by David Teare <dt...@tearesolutions.com>.
XUL sounds nice, but to write apps that the general public can use, it
is not an option to "limit" your users to Mozilla (even though Firefox
rocks). For backoffice / administrative screens, XUL would be okay -
but now you need to become an expert at two languages - one for internal
users, one for external.
LZX / Flex give us the promise of WRITE-ONCE run anywhere - and isn't
that the main reason we all think Java is cool?
A flex based approach has its limitations, but I' can see it's
benefits. Time will tell...
--Dave.
Joachim Van der Auwera wrote:
> David Teare wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
>> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
>>
>> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
>> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML
>> once Longhorn ships.
>>
>> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
>> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
>> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired
>> of clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
>>
>> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
>> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
>
> I agree that a richer thin/browser UI is needed. But there is not need
> to think of or fear XAML. Mozilla already built that, it is called
> XUL. It already works today, only problem is that documentation seems
> to be very thin.
>
> Personally, I would prefer making my client richer using XUL.
> Disadvantage of course is that this would only work in the Mozilla
> group of browsers, but that it a compromise I have no problem dealing
> with.
>
> Joachim
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheers,
David Teare - IT Consultant
Teare Software Solutions Inc.
(416) 505-1374
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Michael Henderson <mh...@mac.com>.
Hi,
I've not used it much but WebObjects Java Client technology seems a
good model.
The client is a Swing app and uses a client side proxy for the EOF
(ORM) access layer object that communicates with the server-side via
HTTP. The client side gets real objects with business methods, not
Value Objects and the client side ORM API matches the server side API.
Since Cayenne has a similar architecture to EOF my guess is that it
will sooner or later introduce this feature.
Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Joachim Van der Auwera <jo...@progs.be>.
David Teare wrote:
> Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
> best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
>
> I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
> way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML once
> Longhorn ships.
>
> As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
> everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
> with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired of
> clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
>
> Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
> towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
>
> Thoughts?
I agree that a richer thin/browser UI is needed. But there is not need
to think of or fear XAML. Mozilla already built that, it is called XUL.
It already works today, only problem is that documentation seems to be
very thin.
Personally, I would prefer making my client richer using XUL.
Disadvantage of course is that this would only work in the Mozilla group
of browsers, but that it a compromise I have no problem dealing with.
Joachim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by David Teare <dt...@tearesolutions.com>.
Yeah, I hate to think of a world sans google - it has been one of the
best productivity gains along with Tapestry/Spring/Hibernate.
I admit that flash based is not perfect - but I don't see any better
way. LZX gives me hope that we won't all be forced into using XAML once
Longhorn ships.
As for "Who are the users crying out for Rich UI's", I'm one - and
everyone I know that's seen the demo says "holy shit you can do that
with a browser?" (I'm paraphrasing :). I for one am sick and tired of
clicking the "update shopping cart" to see my new order totals....
Anyway - since this is a Tapestry form, let's direct the conversation
towards how to use LZX with Tapestry.
Thoughts?
--Dave.
Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
> circumstances for a specific audience, for example administrators
> dealing with lots of db interactions where a more stateful app is
> desirable.
>
> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
> CMD-C command to copy text!
>
> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that all
> have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
> search, that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
>
> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
>
> Jamie
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
>
>> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
>> if someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
>>
>> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
>> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
>> gives you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that
>> apps can allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read the
>> edit-preferences page!).
>> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
>> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will scale
>> up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include other
>> .lzx into parent pages is nice).
>>
>> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in my
>> mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and Java.
>> The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS can find a
>> way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows user's to
>> customize the font size, etc.
>>
>> Just my $0.02.
>>
>> --Dave.
>>
>> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>>
>>> +1 on that!
>>>
>>> Jamie
>>>
>>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>>>
>>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
>>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
>>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
>>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
>>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
>>>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>>>
>>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
>>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
>>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
>>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
>>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
>>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>>>
>>>> -Matt
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheers,
David Teare - IT Consultant
Teare Software Solutions Inc.
(416) 505-1374
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Jonny Wray <jo...@yahoo.com>.
My take on it is that the RIA chould (whether it will is another
question) return the html web to what it was designed for - page based
navigation of information, something that can and should be indexed
etc.
I (and I'm sure others) feel like I'm shoehorning my application
development into the web paradigm that was not designed for it.
Ideally, I'd use a thick client but that comes with the usual
client/JVM install problems, and so we use a html/web paradigm which
works but is far from ideal. To me the RIA approach seems to provide a
good intermediate solution. No client install problems (simple plugin
into a browser) but with the power of standalone application
development.
Of course, in theory this sort of user interface can be done with other
technologies, such as applets, javascript, svg, etc but Lazslo is the
first implementation to go open source. Hopefully this will spark some
competition in this arena.
I've yet to play with Lazslo and so don't have a feel for how well the
remoting works. As an aside, this is where people are suggesting
Tapestry may play a part - in generating the remote xml documents. I'm
not sure what will this gain us over, say, using the document option of
a soap protocol, something that exists already with, for example, the
Glue web services tools to make life easier. I'm obviously missing
something as multiple people are suggesting these sorts of integration
solutions. Can anyone fill me in.
--- Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com> wrote:
> I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special
> circumstances
> for a specific audience, for example administrators dealing with lots
>
> of db interactions where a more stateful app is desirable.
>
> The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
> consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
> consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
> information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
> HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
> site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
> right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
> CMD-C command to copy text!
>
> I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that
> all
> have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't
> search,
> that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
>
> Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
>
> Jamie
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
>
> > I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and
> if
> > someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
> >
> > I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
> > quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo
> gives
> > you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that apps
> can
> > allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read the
> > edit-preferences page!).
> > Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
>
> > far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will
> scale
> > up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include other
> .lzx
> > into parent pages is nice).
> >
> > Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in
> my
> > mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and
> Java.
> > The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS can find
> a
> > way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows user's to
> > customize the font size, etc.
> >
> > Just my $0.02.
> >
> > --Dave.
> >
> > Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on that!
> >>
> >> Jamie
> >>
> >> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
> >>
> >>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
> >>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
> >>>
> >>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of
> non-standard
> >>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult
> to
> >>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
> >>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
> >>> Applications
> >>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
> >>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
> >>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that
> were
> >>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me
> back to
> >>> the HTML frames model of old.
> >>>
> >>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet"
> types
> >>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by
> the
> >>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked
> quite
> >>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't
> need
> >>> our
> >>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI
> controls
> >>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
> >>>
> >>> -Matt
> >>>
> >>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>.
I think that these rich Web apps are best used in special circumstances
for a specific audience, for example administrators dealing with lots
of db interactions where a more stateful app is desirable.
The power of the Web + Browser is that the general interface is
consistent across applications. Of course for this simplicity and
consistency, you sacrifice power. I have one site I go to for
information fairly regularly right now that is completely Flash. No
HTML. It's completely unnecessary because it's just an informational
site. I can't Google it and I can only copy content if I use the
right-click drop-down menu because the programmer hasn't added the
CMD-C command to copy text!
I dread to think of a Web filled mainly with Flash type sites that all
have differing controls that I have to learn, that Google can't search,
that have gratuitous animations I have to watch.
Who are these users that are crying out for rich UI's?
Jamie
On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:24 PM, David Teare wrote:
> I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and if
> someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
>
> I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps
> quite usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo gives
> you complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that apps can
> allow users to personalize them (assuming they can read the
> edit-preferences page!).
> Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus
> far - I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will scale
> up to meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include other .lzx
> into parent pages is nice).
>
> Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in my
> mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and Java.
> The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS can find a
> way to integrate them - imagine a component that allows user's to
> customize the font size, etc.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> --Dave.
>
> Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
>
>> +1 on that!
>>
>> Jamie
>>
>> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>>
>>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
>>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
>>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty.
>>> Applications
>>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
>>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
>>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>>
>>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
>>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
>>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
>>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need
>>> our
>>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
>>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by David Teare <dt...@tearesolutions.com>.
I have to disagree - I think users are crying out for rich UI's and if
someone can get it right they will spread like wild-fire.
I do everything at 1920x1200 and I have found the flash based apps quite
usable. IMHO the fonts are "just right", but since Laszlo gives you
complete control over font sizes, it is conceivable that apps can allow
users to personalize them (assuming they can read the edit-preferences
page!).
Further more, I have found the XML amazingly easy to work with thus far
- I'm still a newbie, but from what I've seen the XML will scale up to
meet complex requirements (i.e. being able to include other .lzx into
parent pages is nice).
Now, how does Tapestry fit into this new model? It's not clear in my
mind yet, but to me Tapestry can be the 'glue' between lzx and Java.
The component model of Tapestry is awesome, so I hope HLS can find a way
to integrate them - imagine a component that allows user's to customize
the font size, etc.
Just my $0.02.
--Dave.
Jamie Orchard-Hays wrote:
> +1 on that!
>
> Jamie
>
> On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
>
>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>
>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>
>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>.
+1 on that!
Jamie
On Oct 8, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Matt Welch wrote:
> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>
> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
> the HTML frames model of old.
>
> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>
> -Matt
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Jamie Orchard-Hays <ja...@dang.com>.
For sure.
On Oct 8, 2004, at 3:45 PM, Giulio Cesare Solaroli wrote:
> To me the real missing tool is an easy way to easily handle background
> communications between the browser and the server in order to update
> the content of the interface without reloading the whole page.
>
> Google, for GMail, has developed a very rich javascript framework with
> many useful methods to handle this kind of communications.
>
> Giulio Cesare Solaroli
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:49:34 -0500, Matt Welch
> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
>> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>>
>> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
>> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
>> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
>> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
>> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
>> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
>> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
>> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
>> the HTML frames model of old.
>>
>> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
>> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
>> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
>> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
>> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
>> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Giulio Cesare Solaroli <gi...@gmail.com>.
To me the real missing tool is an easy way to easily handle background
communications between the browser and the server in order to update
the content of the interface without reloading the whole page.
Google, for GMail, has developed a very rich javascript framework with
many useful methods to handle this kind of communications.
Giulio Cesare Solaroli
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:49:34 -0500, Matt Welch <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
> responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
>
> The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
> and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
> use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
> applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
> that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
> seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
> Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
> scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
> the HTML frames model of old.
>
> The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
> like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
> flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
> well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
> users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
> just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Matt Welch <Ma...@gmail.com>.
Maybe I'm just jaded against Flash, but I've found all of the
responses to Lazlo a little surprising.
The demo applications were nifty "looking", but full of non-standard
and non-intuitive controls. They were not resizable and difficult to
use at my desktop resolution (1280x1024). The language the
applications are programmed in is XML. That's just nasty. Applications
that were bigger than the popped-up browser window (and they all
seemed to be) didn't scroll properly with the mousewheel.
Additionally, the applications themselves had inner panes that were
scrollable (again, not with the mouse wheel). That's takes me back to
the HTML frames model of old.
The only demos that seems to make sense were the small "applet" types
like the weather demo where a very specific task was performed by the
flash app. Having flash perform these kinds of functions worked quite
well. Having the entire UI modeled in flash doesn't. We don't need our
users to have to relearn a whole new set of inconsistent UI controls
just so we can have flashy animations and transparency effects.
-Matt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by David Solis <h....@gmail.com>.
We integrated flash with Tapestry trying to emulate Macromedia remote flash .
Our work is/was rather primitive if it is compared toLaszlo solution.
Regards
D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
These run along my thoughts ... Lazlo as super-components, and use of
Tapestry instead of servlet & JSP to communicate between the Lazlo app
and the server. Tapestry is, I think, well situated to do all of this.
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 11:48:36 -0400, Eli Doran <el...@elidoran.com> wrote:
>
> I assume at least some of you have seen that Lazlo has released its rich
> application client framework as open source to compete with Macromedia
> Flex. It uses its own XML markup to create the user interface and
> communicate data. I was wondering if any of you had comments on
> integrating this with Tapestry. It seems that the rather amazing
> extensibility of Tapestry would allow XML templates for the UI and
> services that easily render the necessary XML for data requests. I
> included the link below for the TSS thread. Someone did mention using
> Tapestry as well. I think Tapestry would work wonders above any
> alternatives they have discussed.
>
> There is a post on Howard's blog a while back mentioning how nice it
> would be to use Flex and Tapestry together (I seem to remember it but
> have not checked recently). Does Lazlo's product seem an equally
> enticing combination?
>
> Thank you,
> the curious,
> Eli Doran
>
> See:
>
> http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=29237#141412
> http://www.laszlosystems.com/products/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Tapestry integration with Lazlo Open Source Release
Posted by Eli Doran <el...@elidoran.com>.
I assume at least some of you have seen that Lazlo has released its rich
application client framework as open source to compete with Macromedia
Flex. It uses its own XML markup to create the user interface and
communicate data. I was wondering if any of you had comments on
integrating this with Tapestry. It seems that the rather amazing
extensibility of Tapestry would allow XML templates for the UI and
services that easily render the necessary XML for data requests. I
included the link below for the TSS thread. Someone did mention using
Tapestry as well. I think Tapestry would work wonders above any
alternatives they have discussed.
There is a post on Howard's blog a while back mentioning how nice it
would be to use Flex and Tapestry together (I seem to remember it but
have not checked recently). Does Lazlo's product seem an equally
enticing combination?
Thank you,
the curious,
Eli Doran
See:
http://theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=29237#141412
http://www.laszlosystems.com/products/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: loading image in for each
Posted by abangkis <ab...@sadikungroup.com>.
Wow, thanks paul.
Your explanation helps me a lot !
Abangkis P
Paul Ferraro wrote:
> Storing the images in a protected directory on your web server is
> definitely a faster method of serving them, although database is often
> easier if images are added/updated/removed with any regularity.
> If you're storing the images in the database, you'll want to write a
> custom IEngineService that either fetches an image from the database
> and streams it back to the client.
> If you are using the file path approach, you'll need to set up the
> appropriate security constraints in your web.xml. You then have the
> option of using J2EE security roles to grant access to the images, or
> creating a custom IEngineService that handles the authorization and
> streaming. If you choose the custom service approach, your service
> would simply fetch the path (relative to the servlet context path)
> from the database and forward the request to that path (request
> forwarding conveniently bypasses any security constraints contained in
> your web.xml).
>
> If you've gone with a custom service approach, within your Foreach,
> use the following to generate the img tag to point to utilize your
> service:
>
> <img jwcid="@Any" src="ognl:imageURL"/>
>
> public String getImageURL()
> {
> IEngineService service =
> this.getPage().getEngine().getService("YourServiceName");
> ILink link = service.getLink(this.getPage().getRequestCycle(),
> this, new Object[] { serviceParameter1, serviceParameter2 });
> return link.getURL();
> }
>
> Paul
>
> abangkis wrote:
>
>> it contains the image full path at the server, i want it to accessed
>> only through my application.
>> I'm considering saving the image in the database. But that can make
>> the database extremely
>> large in size. Maybe you can give me some perspective about this two
>> option.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Abangkis P
>>
>> Paul Ferraro wrote:
>>
>>> Does this list of images from the database contain the image urls?
>>> or the images themselves?
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> abangkis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it
>>>> into a list and i'm trying
>>>> to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to
>>>> do that ?
>>>> because i previously load an image using Image component, and i
>>>> cant change the path
>>>> in for each dinamically.
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>> Abangkis P
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: loading image in for each
Posted by Paul Ferraro <pm...@columbia.edu>.
Storing the images in a protected directory on your web server is
definitely a faster method of serving them, although database is often
easier if images are added/updated/removed with any regularity.
If you're storing the images in the database, you'll want to write a
custom IEngineService that either fetches an image from the database and
streams it back to the client.
If you are using the file path approach, you'll need to set up the
appropriate security constraints in your web.xml. You then have the
option of using J2EE security roles to grant access to the images, or
creating a custom IEngineService that handles the authorization and
streaming. If you choose the custom service approach, your service
would simply fetch the path (relative to the servlet context path) from
the database and forward the request to that path (request forwarding
conveniently bypasses any security constraints contained in your web.xml).
If you've gone with a custom service approach, within your Foreach, use
the following to generate the img tag to point to utilize your service:
<img jwcid="@Any" src="ognl:imageURL"/>
public String getImageURL()
{
IEngineService service =
this.getPage().getEngine().getService("YourServiceName");
ILink link = service.getLink(this.getPage().getRequestCycle(), this,
new Object[] { serviceParameter1, serviceParameter2 });
return link.getURL();
}
Paul
abangkis wrote:
> it contains the image full path at the server, i want it to accessed
> only through my application.
> I'm considering saving the image in the database. But that can make
> the database extremely
> large in size. Maybe you can give me some perspective about this two
> option.
>
> Thanks
>
> Abangkis P
>
> Paul Ferraro wrote:
>
>> Does this list of images from the database contain the image urls?
>> or the images themselves?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> abangkis wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it
>>> into a list and i'm trying
>>> to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to do
>>> that ?
>>> because i previously load an image using Image component, and i cant
>>> change the path
>>> in for each dinamically.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>>
>>> Abangkis P
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: loading image in for each
Posted by abangkis <ab...@sadikungroup.com>.
it contains the image full path at the server, i want it to accessed
only through my application.
I'm considering saving the image in the database. But that can make the
database extremely
large in size. Maybe you can give me some perspective about this two option.
Thanks
Abangkis P
Paul Ferraro wrote:
> Does this list of images from the database contain the image urls? or
> the images themselves?
>
> Paul
>
> abangkis wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it
>> into a list and i'm trying
>> to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to do
>> that ?
>> because i previously load an image using Image component, and i cant
>> change the path
>> in for each dinamically.
>>
>> TIA
>>
>> Abangkis P
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: loading image in for each
Posted by Paul Ferraro <pm...@columbia.edu>.
Does this list of images from the database contain the image urls? or
the images themselves?
Paul
abangkis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i have a list of image that i saved in the database. i populate it
> into a list and i'm trying
> to load the image in a for each cycle, any one can tell me how to do
> that ?
> because i previously load an image using Image component, and i cant
> change the path
> in for each dinamically.
>
> TIA
>
> Abangkis P
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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