On Mon, June 19, 2006 3:22 pm, Alexandru Popescu wrote: >> Just to make sure it's really, really clear, because I think it >> ultimately >> leads to two different places... If I wanted a treeview widget let's >> say, >> it would be built on top of DWR (integrated directly into SAF2 in some >> fashion)? Is that what your understanding is Alexandru? >> > > true
Ok... didn't want to put you on the spot or anything :) LOL ... the reason I asked, why I think it's important, is that what Dojo offers that DWR does not is the whole widget "framework" I guess you could call it... it handles most, of not all, of the client-side plumbing behind widgets, and more importantly, gives you a consistent model to code widgets to. DWR offers nothing like that. So, if DWR is the preferred SAF2 solution, or the only integrated AJAX capability even (I don't think anyone said Dojo should be dropped entirely though, did they?), then you almost have to start down a path of creating a widget model on top of DWR for SAF2. Now, this isn't mind-numblingly difficult (I know, I've done it, and am currently doing it a second (and sort of a third!) time), but if you go with DWR, you lose this. In terms of AJAX outside the realm of widgets, I think Martin is probably right, the difference between DWR and Dojo isn't significant, at least as far as the client-side of things go... I'm still not sure Dojo says anything about the server-side, as DWR does, but that aside, they seem to be pretty similar in terms of RPC. It's in terms of widgets where I think the difference is pronounced, so knowing precisely what the goal is (and what everyone understands it to be!) to begin with is very important in this case. > ./alex Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
