tapestry-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From andyhot <andy...@di.uoa.gr>
Subject Re: Prototype vs. JQuery vs. Dojo 0.9 vs. ???
Date Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:57:49 GMT
I think you're misunderstanding my intentions :)

Here are the facts the way i see them:
- Tapestry needs some js functions for its own use, hence tapestry.js
- I do NOT want to force users (not even myself) to go through 
tapestry.js - they should be able to
use the library they want to
- I do NOT want to force users to have to load another library simply 
because tapestry.js needs it

And here's where i'd be heading at:
- Plan js usage in such a way that alternatives to tapestry.js (such as 
tapestry-yui.js or tapestry-jquery.js,
or even tapestry-donothing.js) are easy to write and even easier to include

For the record, i'm close to the tapestry-donothing.js step for T4.

Joost Schouten wrote:
> Hi,
> I see huge potential for build in AJAX with tapestry. Component reloading is
> something which wasn't too hard to implement. But I would not like to be
> locked in, or have the framework of choice included even if I don't need it
> (love your script loading feature btw).
> I am a big fan of making my own choices in this area. Martin Reurings
> recently posted about this in the user group:
> http://www.nabble.com/T5:-using-DOJO--t4368411.html#a12869068 I strongly
> agree and would love to see this kind of granularity. Making a tapestry.js
> as a wrapper for any framework seems more a confinement than an addition.
> I'd rather see a clean tapestry module without any client side scripting and
> potentially one or more modules using the framework of choice.
> We already had to do some cutting to have Tapestry leave the scripting to
> us. I hope Tapestry won't make the same mistake a lot of JSF implementations
> have made.
> Cheers,
> Joost
> We have just stripped T5 completely of all it's javascript as it was causing
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Andreou [mailto:andreoua@gmail.com] On Behalf Of andyhot
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 2:46 PM
> To: Tapestry development
> Subject: Re: Prototype vs. JQuery vs. Dojo 0.9 vs. ???
> In my mind there's only one correct answer for Tapestry to this:
> nothing and everything!
> ext is looking great these days, yui is ... yahoo, dojo 0.9-1.0 is sooo 
> improved
> and prototype is ... the good old prototype - and who knows what's to come
> If anyone's been looking at my recent 4.1 commits, i've set to abstract 
> all dojo calls through
> the tapestry object - and i've been able to do this by introducing just 
> 6-7 more functions in it.
> And i can now replace dojo with other libraries - i expect a few more 
> technical challenges, but
> it should be straightforward to work
> So, perhaps this would prove as a guide for T5 as well
> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>> I've been having some fun wrapping my brain around JQuery.
>> I'm not fully certain its a great fit however.
>> For hand-tooled web pages, maybe traditional JSPs, it would be perfectly
>> good.
>> But it's really built around identifying elements that need "special
>> attention" in terms of CSS class and page structure, and then applying
>> uniform effects and logic (in the form of even handlers) to them.
>> Tapestry is more geared towards the server side "seeding" the client side
>> with specific element ids, and then hooking up the appropriate event
> handler
>> that way.
>> In fact, that is more Protoype's angle, the whole point of $("myid") being
>> so easy.  JQuery lets you use Document.getElementById() ... it's one area
>> where the $() function has no great magic.
>> Can Tapestry shift?  Should it?  Would the newly revised Dojo be a better
>> fit?

Andreas Andreou - andyhot@apache.org - http://andyhot.di.uoa.gr
Tapestry / Tacos developer
Open Source / JEE Consulting

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

View raw message