and of course, Jason could go through my doings just to make sure i get it right. :-)
----- Original Message ---- From: tm jee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Struts Developers List <dev@struts.apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, 20 June, 2006 11:55:29 PM Subject: Re: [action2] Upgrade Dojo toolkit Thanks for the informative reply Jason. Its good to get things cleared out. :-) > we do a lot of custom tags based on Dojo Is it possible to contribute those tags to SAF2? Its ok if we get a dump of the source, I could work on it, make sure they get documented propertly and have examples for each of them. It it is not possible, it would still be nice if you could share with us what custom component tags have been developed, so hopefully we could duplicate them and make them available in SAF2. Well, for the benifits of the users..... ok, to be honest, for the benifit of me as well. What do you think? :-) regards ----- Original Message ---- From: Jason Carreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: dev@struts.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, 20 June, 2006 11:25:54 PM Subject: Re: [action2] Upgrade Dojo toolkit > > 2. The current Dojo based widgets are simple enough > to be used in some > sample/tutorial like pages but for real life apps > they don't work (or > put it in another more realistic way: I haven't been > able to have them > working within a normal timeframe). > I have to mention, that I haven't used the > Dojo-based tree, but I > tried all the others. > Well, I don't use the ww:a or ww:div tags that much, but we do a lot of custom tags based on Dojo, the tree tag being the one I spent the time to port back to WW (although I didn't doc it, sorry). From our perspective, WW tags + Freemarker templates + Dojo widgets works great. It's not really rocket science. I talked with Patrick, and the understanding we came to was that the Dojo stuff would still be there in a different theme, and there would be a default AJAX theme that would be simpler to use (I guess). My main concern is what you lose: 1) The publish / subscribe topics -> this is the biggest one for me. It only really makes sense to make a lot of simple little AJAX widgets if you can loosely couple them and have them interact based on runtime wiring, rather than having to have them all pre-configured together. Otherwise you're back to custom Javascript coding everything, which you get to if you get very complicated anyway... 2) The widget framework -> As Martin pointed out, the widget framework is really excellent and gives you a nice structure to build widgets in. No, it's not super-duper-easy, but we're still in the cowboy phase of AJAX development... Let's face it, you're going to have to get your hands dirty and learn a little bit if you want to do anything real. Patrick and Ian say Prototype, etc. are easier to get your hands dirty with. Ok, I'll accept that. Writing my first Dojo widget wasn't that quick or painless. Makes sense to give users something they can get going with quicker. Personally, I'll stick with Dojo. For me, it's the same as the script-language vs. Java debate. Script languages are undoubtedly quicker to get something going with, but if you're engineering an enterprise app you use Java. I see the same level of engineering commitment and corporate backing behind Dojo as I see behind Java. Who knows? With IBM and Sun behind Dojo maybe we'll even see some usability experts and technical writers assigned and Dojo will end up being easy to use. We're not shutting the door on Dojo, and maybe it will be the default again in the future. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=34813&messageID=68099#68099 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
