Hey Guys, >From wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaadin "Vaadin utilizes Google Web Toolkit for rendering the resulting web page. While Google Web Toolkit operates only client-side (i.e. a browser's JavaScript engine) – which could lead to trust issues – Vaadin adds server-side validation to all actions. This means that if the client data is tampered with, the server notices this and doesn't allow it."
So its not really a counter to the "threat", its a way to make life "easier" to get into GWT.... Sam On 16/06/2010 09:52, Scott Gray wrote: > After a 2 second glance it looks interesting enough to bookmark. Based on my > current wish list I should be able to comment further in 2012 :-) > > Regards > Scott > > HotWax Media > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > > On 16/06/2010, at 1:18 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote: > >> I think you make a really great point here. JQuery is a utility not a >> framework and when it comes to utility it really delivers the goods. >> >> Looking back to Dojo, I still believe we need something to counter the >> GWT-EXT "threat" because users continue to demand an "application" feel >> when it comes to ERP. I find Vaadin (vaadin.com) very interesting, if >> somewhat daunting in scale. It appears to offer the level of abstraction >> necessary to integrate the screen and form widget systems and is under >> the Apache License (which makes it very, very interesting). Has anyone >> else looked seriously at Vaadin? >> >> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> Looks like we have a good consensus around Jquery so far. >>> >>> I must say that the main arugment for Dojo was its serious. It's a >>> real consistent framework with embedded widgets, not only an API. All >>> those third parties Jquery's widgets (and Prototypes's) are a bit >>> frightening. On the other hand when you want to upgrade to 1.4 you >>> find that it's not as serious as we thought, and I'm *very >>> disapointed* about that. And as those widgets are open source, it's >>> not as frightening as it 1st seems. For instance, we use a third party >>> calendar and we have already poked in (for layered lookups) without >>> issues. >>> >>> At the time we decided to embed Doo and Prototype some pointed also >>> Jquery with good arguments [1] [2][3]. At this time we decided that >>> anyway we were not tied to any Ajax frameworks yet. >>> >>> So yes, +1 for me also, especially now that Sascha wants to tackle it, >>> and I'm sure we will support his effort! >>> >>> Thanks guys >>> >>> Jacques >>> [1] Yoav Shapira in 2006: http://markmail.org/message/ftw7pjfrzxyxmsuz >>> [2] Ean in 2007 http://markmail.org/message/jf5qvxblvrbmtvae (and we >>> know now than when there is a dual licensing we can pick the one we >>> want, here MIT :o) >>> [3] Ean in 2007 http://markmail.org/message/vqjjtribdrulhbl3. When the >>> serious one is less serious than the other (demo in time). Dojo is >>> known to have documentation problems also... Found this link >>> http://www.ajaxdaddy.com/demo-dojo-fisheye.html >> -- >> Ean Schuessler, CTO >> e...@brainfood.com >> 214-720-0700 x 315 >> Brainfood, Inc. >> http://www.brainfood.com >> >
