RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Craig R. McClanahan]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Daniel Joshua wrote:

> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:36:18 +0800
> From: Daniel Joshua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Yup I read it...
>
> I also read an article on it at
> http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-11-2002/jw-1129-jsf.html
>
> But, my question is, how long before it will be ready for use?

There will be at least one more EA type release (and I'll release an EA of
a Struts integration library at the same time), with final release of
JavaServer Faces aimed at sometime next year.  Sorry I can't be more
precise than that ... the schedule's under discussion in the Expert Group.

>
> PS: It looks cool!
>

Thanks ... it's designed to be cool :-).

> Regards,
> Daniel

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Craig R. McClanahan]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Savantraj, Chennamakal Subramanian wrote:

> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:21:52 +0800
> From: "Savantraj, Chennamakal Subramanian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> By considering complcated GUI, we are planning to move to Swing
> Applications, which are deployed using "WEB START".
> Our idea is to use a controller to Navigate between Swing Application and
> Server side Business Logic.
> So the core business Logic still run in server and GUI components run
> Locally.Not decided yet how to Transfer Data back and forth between
> Application and Server.Pls share your experience..
> Any serious problem(s) with this approach?

In general, this is a viable solution for UIs that are not amenable to the
limitations of HTML browsers, and/or need to run in an environment where a
browser is not available.  The primary downsides are that your user must
download a JVM if they don't have one (although only once), and your
developers must know both Swing and HTML if you're delivering the same app
both ways.

For client-server communication, you could look at a "web services" style
approach, or perhaps design some Struts actions that accept serialized
Java objects represent the request and return a serialized Java object
containing the results.  The request-response nature of HTTP is actually
quite helpful for this sort of requirement.

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Andrew Hill]

Ah. It would seem there is. :-)
JSF sounds rather good. I like!


JavaServer Faces technology simplifies building user interfaces for
JavaServer applications. With the well-defined programming model that
JavaServer Faces provides, developers of varying skill levels can quickly
and easily build web applications by: assembling reusable UI components in a
page, connecting these components to an application data source, and wiring
client-generated events to server-side event handlers. With the power of
JavaServer Faces technology, these web applications handle all of the
complexity of managing the user interface on the server, allowing the
application developer to focus on application code.


-Original Message-
From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:17
To: Craig R. McClanahan
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


So the components are basically a standardised way of keeping track of
widget state on the server side between requests?
Is their also an event model then?

-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:05
To: Struts Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?




On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Andrew Hill wrote:

> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:02:34 +0800
> From: Andrew Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> >>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
> for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"
>
> Flash! ;-)
>

But isn't that still essentially client side scripting embedded in the
presentation logic?  :-)

> btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
> rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches
only,
> or more generic than that?
>

JSF is not applicable only to JSP.  There is a Java API that talks to the
component layer, plus the ability to plug in any rendering engine you want
-- JSP custom tags are only one such possible implementation.  In fact,
it should be quite feasible to write Flash renderers for JSF components.
The components themselves don't care.

Craig


>
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> > From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
> >
> > Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> > that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> > embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
> > a workaround.
>
> Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
> for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?
>
> >  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
> > Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
> > seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes me
> > doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via the
> > Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> > approach.
> > Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
> > Model 2X approach?
> >
>
> You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X" --
> I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
> description.
>
> Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to be
> focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set of
> common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only way
> they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using all
> sorts of other technologies as well.
>
> > Jon.
> >
>
> Craig
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Daniel Joshua]

Yup I read it...

I also read an article on it at
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-11-2002/jw-1129-jsf.html

But, my question is, how long before it will be ready for use?

PS: It looks cool!

Regards,
Daniel


-Original Message-
From: edgar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:22 AM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


The JSF Spec is a MUST READ for serious web application developers.
There is a lot of stuff going on and it will seriously effect the way
you develop and think about web applications.

http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=127

Edgar

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 10:03 PM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


>>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated
>>UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"

Flash! ;-)

btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches
only, or more generic than that?


-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?




On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of a
> workaround.

Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?

>  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the Model 2
> approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
> seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes
> me doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via

> the Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> approach. Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred
> over the Model 2X approach?
>

You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X"
-- I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
description.

Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to
be focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set
of common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only
way they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using
all sorts of other technologies as well.

> Jon.
>

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Savantraj, Chennamakal Subramanian]

By considering complcated GUI, we are planning to move to Swing
Applications, which are deployed using "WEB START".
Our idea is to use a controller to Navigate between Swing Application and
Server side Business Logic. 
So the core business Logic still run in server and GUI components run
Locally.Not decided yet how to Transfer Data back and forth between
Application and Server.Pls share your experience..
Any serious problem(s) with this approach?

-Original Message-
From: edgar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:22 AM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


The JSF Spec is a MUST READ for serious web application developers.
There is a lot of stuff going on and it will seriously effect the way
you develop and think about web applications.

http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=127

Edgar

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 10:03 PM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


>>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated 
>>UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"

Flash! ;-)

btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches
only, or more generic than that?


-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?




On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact 
> that a scripting language whether client or server side can be 
> embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of a 
> workaround.

Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?

>  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the Model 2 
> approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't 
> seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes 
> me doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via

> the Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2 
> approach. Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred 
> over the Model 2X approach?
>

You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X"
-- I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
description.

Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to
be focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set
of common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only
way they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using
all sorts of other technologies as well.

> Jon.
>

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

---
This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual
or entity named above and may contain information that is privileged. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error, please notify us immediately by return email
or telephone and destroy the original message. Thank you. - This mail is
sent via Sony Asia Pacific Mail Gateway. 
---


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[edgar]

The JSF Spec is a MUST READ for serious web application developers.
There is a lot of stuff going on and it will seriously effect the way
you develop and think about web applications.

http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=127

Edgar

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 10:03 PM
To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


>>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated 
>>UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"

Flash! ;-)

btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches
only, or more generic than that?


-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?




On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact 
> that a scripting language whether client or server side can be 
> embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of a 
> workaround.

Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?

>  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the Model 2 
> approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't 
> seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes 
> me doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via

> the Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2 
> approach. Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred 
> over the Model 2X approach?
>

You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X"
-- I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
description.

Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to
be focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set
of common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only
way they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using
all sorts of other technologies as well.

> Jon.
>

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Craig R. McClanahan]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Andrew Hill wrote:

> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:02:34 +0800
> From: Andrew Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> >>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
> for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"
>
> Flash! ;-)
>

But isn't that still essentially client side scripting embedded in the
presentation logic?  :-)

> btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
> rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches only,
> or more generic than that?
>

JSF is not applicable only to JSP.  There is a Java API that talks to the
component layer, plus the ability to plug in any rendering engine you want
-- JSP custom tags are only one such possible implementation.  In fact,
it should be quite feasible to write Flash renderers for JSF components.
The components themselves don't care.

Craig


>
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> > From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
> >
> > Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> > that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> > embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
> > a workaround.
>
> Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
> for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?
>
> >  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
> > Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
> > seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes me
> > doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via the
> > Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> > approach.
> > Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
> > Model 2X approach?
> >
>
> You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X" --
> I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
> description.
>
> Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to be
> focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set of
> common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only way
> they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using all
> sorts of other technologies as well.
>
> > Jon.
> >
>
> Craig
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Andrew Hill]

>>"Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?"

Flash! ;-)

btw: I havent had time to look at JSF yet. Glad to hear its not just for
rendering HTML, but is it applicable to JSP based rendering approaches only,
or more generic than that?


-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:18
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?




On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
> a workaround.

Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?

>  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
> Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
> seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes me
> doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via the
> Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> approach.
> Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
> Model 2X approach?
>

You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X" --
I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
description.

Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to be
focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set of
common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only way
they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using all
sorts of other technologies as well.

> Jon.
>

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Wendy Cameron]

For Model 2X try

http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-02-2002/jw-0201-strutsxslt.html

http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/whitepaper.xhtml

http://www.orbeon.com/oxf/

Regards Wendy

> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:18 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:
> 
> > Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> > From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
> >
> > Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> > that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> > embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
> > a workaround.
> 
> Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build 
> complicated UIs
> for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?
> 
> >  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
> > Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the 
> latter doesn't
> > seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing 
> that makes me
> > doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this 
> way via the
> > Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> > approach.
> > Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
> > Model 2X approach?
> >
> 
> You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by 
> "Model 2X" --
> I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
> description.
> 
> Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal 
> of JSF to be
> focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set of
> common components included, but no requirement that HTML be 
> the only way
> they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations 
> using all
> sorts of other technologies as well.
> 
> > Jon.
> >
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Craig R. McClanahan]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:28:39 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact
> that a scripting language whether client or server side can be
> embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
> a workaround.

Have you got an alternative suggestion for how to build complicated UIs
for a web browser *without* using client side JavaScript?

>  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
> Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
> seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes me
> doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via the
> Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
> approach.
> Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
> Model 2X approach?
>

You'll have to point me at a definition of what you mean by "Model 2X" --
I've seen the term bandied about, but don't know of any formal
description.

Regarding JavaServer Faces in particular, it is *not* a goal of JSF to be
focused purely on HTML as the markup language.  There will be a set of
common components included, but no requirement that HTML be the only way
they are rendered.  I fully expect to see JSF implementations using all
sorts of other technologies as well.

> Jon.
>

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Jonathan Holloway]

Ok in principle then it seems fine it's just I don't like the fact 
that a scripting language whether client or server side can be 
embedded in the presentation logic, it still seems like a bit of
a workaround.  I've wondered about whether the Model2X approach and the
Model 2 approach for some while now and it seems like the latter doesn't
seperate the concerns as much as Model 2X.  The only thing that makes me
doubt this is the fact that Sun and yourself have gone this way via the 
Model 2 approach with Java Server Faces rather than the Model 2
approach. 
Is there any particular reason why this method is preferred over the
Model 2X approach?

Jon.

-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 28 November 2002 19:22
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

(Waiting for the turkey to be ready ... :-)

On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 09:11:51 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok fair enough but surely the issue of embedding all this javascript
> In my html is reversing the whole embedding presentation logic within
> business logic?  Surely  embedding javascript in a JSP is just as bad
> as embedding scriptlets in a JSP?  Or am I missing the point here
> somewhere :) ?
>

The big difference is that scriptlets execute on the server, as the page
is being generated -- and have access to the entire object model of your
application (leading to the temptation to embed business logic there).
JavaScript doesn't execute on the server, it executes on the client, and
doesn't have direct access to your business objects.

Embedding JavaScript to enhance the user experience (i.e. improve the
quality of the presentation) is fine.  An example of this is the client
side validation JavaScript that can be created by the Validator
Framework
-- this improves life for the user by catching errors earlier.

Using JavaScript to send background HTTP requests that grab stuff
directly
from the database (bypassing the normal control flow) and changing the
contents of select lists is a little more iffy -- but some intranet
based
apps (where the 100mbps network makes it pretty fast) will undoubtedly
use
such techniques to more accurately simulate what a GUI app can do.  You
can still flow such requests through the controller servlet, though --
to
special actions that just return data instead of HTML -- and that seems
fairly reasonable.

> Jonathan Holloway.
>

Craig


> -Original Message-
> From: Affan Qureshi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 28 November 2002 03:31
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> My comment between lines.
>
> > Say I want to display two lists of objects and swap lists in and out
> of
> > these two
> > lists as required.
> >
> > List A   -->   List B
> > Object A  Object C
> > Object B
> >
> > e.g. Move object B to List B
> >
> > I also want to add/remove objects as required to these lists.  Is
this
> > possible in
> > Struts.  I've looked at the struts-layout library on
> > http://struts-application-servers.com/
> > but it look sto be buggy.  Has anbody actually had any success with
> > this?
>
> This is shown in Tiles portal example. Works pretty well for simple
> purposes. Look at the place where you can add, delete, change tiles in
> the
> portal setup. You dont have to use tables like struts-layout. You can
> use
> some HTML select lists and some simple JS to manipulate them.
>
> > I also want to be able to display a tree component to a user and
allow
> > the user to
> > manipulate the tree by adding or removing nodes to the tree.  Is
this
> > possible with
> > any of the struts user interface components or will I have to use an
> > applet or a
> > sophiticated javascript tree to achieve this.  If so how do I
> integrate
> > it with Struts?
>
> Struts is just another Web application and runs servlets and JSPs. You
> need
> to come up with your own way to intergrate your stuff (JavaScript,
> Applets)
> with it. Struts does not provide you with an IDE. It provides you with
a
> framwork to make your work easy.
>
> > I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems
> to
> > lack the
> > creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a
problem
> > to implement
> > but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if
> I'm
> > wrong.
> >

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Craig R. McClanahan]

(Waiting for the turkey to be ready ... :-)

On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Jonathan Holloway wrote:

> Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 09:11:51 -
> From: Jonathan Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> Ok fair enough but surely the issue of embedding all this javascript
> In my html is reversing the whole embedding presentation logic within
> business logic?  Surely  embedding javascript in a JSP is just as bad
> as embedding scriptlets in a JSP?  Or am I missing the point here
> somewhere :) ?
>

The big difference is that scriptlets execute on the server, as the page
is being generated -- and have access to the entire object model of your
application (leading to the temptation to embed business logic there).
JavaScript doesn't execute on the server, it executes on the client, and
doesn't have direct access to your business objects.

Embedding JavaScript to enhance the user experience (i.e. improve the
quality of the presentation) is fine.  An example of this is the client
side validation JavaScript that can be created by the Validator Framework
-- this improves life for the user by catching errors earlier.

Using JavaScript to send background HTTP requests that grab stuff directly
from the database (bypassing the normal control flow) and changing the
contents of select lists is a little more iffy -- but some intranet based
apps (where the 100mbps network makes it pretty fast) will undoubtedly use
such techniques to more accurately simulate what a GUI app can do.  You
can still flow such requests through the controller servlet, though -- to
special actions that just return data instead of HTML -- and that seems
fairly reasonable.

> Jonathan Holloway.
>

Craig


> -Original Message-
> From: Affan Qureshi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 28 November 2002 03:31
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> My comment between lines.
>
> > Say I want to display two lists of objects and swap lists in and out
> of
> > these two
> > lists as required.
> >
> > List A   -->   List B
> > Object A  Object C
> > Object B
> >
> > e.g. Move object B to List B
> >
> > I also want to add/remove objects as required to these lists.  Is this
> > possible in
> > Struts.  I've looked at the struts-layout library on
> > http://struts-application-servers.com/
> > but it look sto be buggy.  Has anbody actually had any success with
> > this?
>
> This is shown in Tiles portal example. Works pretty well for simple
> purposes. Look at the place where you can add, delete, change tiles in
> the
> portal setup. You dont have to use tables like struts-layout. You can
> use
> some HTML select lists and some simple JS to manipulate them.
>
> > I also want to be able to display a tree component to a user and allow
> > the user to
> > manipulate the tree by adding or removing nodes to the tree.  Is this
> > possible with
> > any of the struts user interface components or will I have to use an
> > applet or a
> > sophiticated javascript tree to achieve this.  If so how do I
> integrate
> > it with Struts?
>
> Struts is just another Web application and runs servlets and JSPs. You
> need
> to come up with your own way to intergrate your stuff (JavaScript,
> Applets)
> with it. Struts does not provide you with an IDE. It provides you with a
> framwork to make your work easy.
>
> > I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems
> to
> > lack the
> > creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a problem
> > to implement
> > but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if
> I'm
> > wrong.
> >
>
> KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields
> are
> there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be
> dynamic
> you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems
> to be
> dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the way
> the
> button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested environment.
> Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
> objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic
> form-fields.
>
> But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if I
> want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use
> JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the
> server

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Edgar Dollin]

Nested tags made struts work for me.

Thanks

Edgar

-Original Message-
From: Arron Bates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 8:32 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


> It solves my problem in theory at least : ) all I have to work out now 
> is how to maintain a tree in Struts :( I don't think the applet way is 
> a very nice way of doing it.

Mate, here at the keyboard of monkeys, we aim to please...

http://www.keyboardmonkey.com/pilotlight

... and scroll to the part where it says...
"JSP Recursion & TREES!!!"

...it's about the most flexible tree generation method there is, and I'm
actually being modest. :P

Requires a JSP 1.2 container (>Tomcat3).


Enjoy.


Arron.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Arron Bates]

> It solves my problem in theory at least : ) all I have to
> work out now is how to maintain a tree in Struts :( I don't think the
> applet way is a very nice way of doing it.

Mate, here at the keyboard of monkeys, we aim to please...

http://www.keyboardmonkey.com/pilotlight

... and scroll to the part where it says...
"JSP Recursion & TREES!!!"

...it's about the most flexible tree generation method there is, and I'm
actually being modest. :P

Requires a JSP 1.2 container (>Tomcat3).


Enjoy.


Arron.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Jonathan Holloway]

I guess it's also easy to swap objects between the two models as well, 
this would be a nice addition to the example to allow bananas to be
swapped between bunches.  I did notice the new banana before but I
wanted 
it to take values from fields on the form but I guess this is very
simple 
to do now.  It solves my problem in theory at least : ) all I have to
work
out now is how to maintain a tree in Struts :( I don't think the applet
way
is a very nice way of doing it.

Jon.

-Original Message-
From: Arron Bates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 28 November 2002 13:06
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?

> > I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems
to
> > lack the
> > creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a
problem
> > to implement
> > but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if
I'm
> > wrong.

Have another play, click on "new banana"... :)

http://www.keyboardmonkey.com/StrutMonkey/MonkeyStruts_v2.jsp


> KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields
are
> there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be
dynamic
> you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems
to be
> dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the
way the
> button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested
environment.
> Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
> objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic
form-fields.
> 
> But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if
I
> want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to
use
> JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the
server
> if you only want to add "blank" fields? If anybody has accomplished
this I
> would be glad to know.

It's all up to watever you want to code. The fact that the monkey
example trips to the server has nothing to do with the nested tags.

To write the monkey example in Struts without the nested tags is verging
on impossible, at the very least a truly large headache, it was really
quite easy.

If the nested tags are guilty of anything, they make it very easy (and
even fun?... maybe I'm wired differently) to add more and more
complexity to the structure. The nested tags have made some truly
unwieldy applications, including the reason for their creation.

You just have to ask yourself one question...
Red or Blue pill?  :P


Arron.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Arron Bates]

> > I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems to
> > lack the
> > creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a problem
> > to implement
> > but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if I'm
> > wrong.

Have another play, click on "new banana"... :)

http://www.keyboardmonkey.com/StrutMonkey/MonkeyStruts_v2.jsp


> KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields are
> there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be dynamic
> you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems to be
> dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the way the
> button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested environment.
> Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
> objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic form-fields.
> 
> But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if I
> want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use
> JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the server
> if you only want to add "blank" fields? If anybody has accomplished this I
> would be glad to know.

It's all up to watever you want to code. The fact that the monkey
example trips to the server has nothing to do with the nested tags.

To write the monkey example in Struts without the nested tags is verging
on impossible, at the very least a truly large headache, it was really
quite easy.

If the nested tags are guilty of anything, they make it very easy (and
even fun?... maybe I'm wired differently) to add more and more
complexity to the structure. The nested tags have made some truly
unwieldy applications, including the reason for their creation.

You just have to ask yourself one question...
Red or Blue pill?  :P


Arron.



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Affan Qureshi]

Well. Depends on what logic you want to implement using your JavaScript. If
it pertains to display logic I think there is no harm in using JS. But if it
also specifies rules (like which node can go uder which tree and so on) then
I guess you have a point and need to re-assess the maintainability of the
app in case og Business Rule changes.

Affan

- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Holloway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Struts Users Mailing List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 2:11 PM
Subject: RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?


> Ok fair enough but surely the issue of embedding all this javascript
> In my html is reversing the whole embedding presentation logic within
> business logic?  Surely  embedding javascript in a JSP is just as bad
> as embedding scriptlets in a JSP?  Or am I missing the point here
> somewhere :) ?
>
> Jonathan Holloway.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Affan Qureshi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 28 November 2002 03:31
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?
>
> My comment between lines.
>
> > Say I want to display two lists of objects and swap lists in and out
> of
> > these two
> > lists as required.
> >
> > List A   -->   List B
> > Object A  Object C
> > Object B
> >
> > e.g. Move object B to List B
> >
> > I also want to add/remove objects as required to these lists.  Is this
> > possible in
> > Struts.  I've looked at the struts-layout library on
> > http://struts-application-servers.com/
> > but it look sto be buggy.  Has anbody actually had any success with
> > this?
>
> This is shown in Tiles portal example. Works pretty well for simple
> purposes. Look at the place where you can add, delete, change tiles in
> the
> portal setup. You dont have to use tables like struts-layout. You can
> use
> some HTML select lists and some simple JS to manipulate them.
>
> > I also want to be able to display a tree component to a user and allow
> > the user to
> > manipulate the tree by adding or removing nodes to the tree.  Is this
> > possible with
> > any of the struts user interface components or will I have to use an
> > applet or a
> > sophiticated javascript tree to achieve this.  If so how do I
> integrate
> > it with Struts?
>
> Struts is just another Web application and runs servlets and JSPs. You
> need
> to come up with your own way to intergrate your stuff (JavaScript,
> Applets)
> with it. Struts does not provide you with an IDE. It provides you with a
> framwork to make your work easy.
>
> > I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems
> to
> > lack the
> > creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a problem
> > to implement
> > but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if
> I'm
> > wrong.
> >
>
> KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields
> are
> there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be
> dynamic
> you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems
> to be
> dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the way
> the
> button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested environment.
> Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
> objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic
> form-fields.
>
> But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if I
> want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use
> JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the
> server
> if you only want to add "blank" fields? If anybody has accomplished this
> I
> would be glad to know.
>
> > I know there's a lot of questions abou the above and I'm still
> pondering
> > them as well
> > myself but I just wanted to know whether it is possible to do this in
> > Struts at present.
> > From what I can see it is possible to create simple web based
> > applications using
> > Struts but I haven't come across any really complicated web interfaces
> > yet using
> > Struts, has anybody got any ideas on this or any examples of web
> > applications that
> > are a little more compicated.
>
> > Many thanks,
> > Jon Holloway.
> >
>
> If you find any such resource please let us know.
>
> Regards,
>
> Affan
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

RE: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Jonathan Holloway]

Ok fair enough but surely the issue of embedding all this javascript 
In my html is reversing the whole embedding presentation logic within
business logic?  Surely  embedding javascript in a JSP is just as bad 
as embedding scriptlets in a JSP?  Or am I missing the point here 
somewhere :) ?

Jonathan Holloway.

-Original Message-
From: Affan Qureshi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 28 November 2002 03:31
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?

My comment between lines.

> Say I want to display two lists of objects and swap lists in and out
of
> these two
> lists as required.
>
> List A   -->   List B
> Object A  Object C
> Object B
>
> e.g. Move object B to List B
>
> I also want to add/remove objects as required to these lists.  Is this
> possible in
> Struts.  I've looked at the struts-layout library on
> http://struts-application-servers.com/
> but it look sto be buggy.  Has anbody actually had any success with
> this?

This is shown in Tiles portal example. Works pretty well for simple
purposes. Look at the place where you can add, delete, change tiles in
the
portal setup. You dont have to use tables like struts-layout. You can
use
some HTML select lists and some simple JS to manipulate them.

> I also want to be able to display a tree component to a user and allow
> the user to
> manipulate the tree by adding or removing nodes to the tree.  Is this
> possible with
> any of the struts user interface components or will I have to use an
> applet or a
> sophiticated javascript tree to achieve this.  If so how do I
integrate
> it with Struts?

Struts is just another Web application and runs servlets and JSPs. You
need
to come up with your own way to intergrate your stuff (JavaScript,
Applets)
with it. Struts does not provide you with an IDE. It provides you with a
framwork to make your work easy.

> I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems
to
> lack the
> creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a problem
> to implement
> but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if
I'm
> wrong.
>

KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields
are
there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be
dynamic
you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems
to be
dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the way
the
button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested environment.
Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic
form-fields.

But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if I
want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use
JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the
server
if you only want to add "blank" fields? If anybody has accomplished this
I
would be glad to know.

> I know there's a lot of questions abou the above and I'm still
pondering
> them as well
> myself but I just wanted to know whether it is possible to do this in
> Struts at present.
> From what I can see it is possible to create simple web based
> applications using
> Struts but I haven't come across any really complicated web interfaces
> yet using
> Struts, has anybody got any ideas on this or any examples of web
> applications that
> are a little more compicated.

> Many thanks,
> Jon Holloway.
>

If you find any such resource please let us know.

Regards,

Affan


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Complicated Web Interfaces?

[Affan Qureshi]

My comment between lines.

> Say I want to display two lists of objects and swap lists in and out of
> these two
> lists as required.
>
> List A   -->   List B
> Object A  Object C
> Object B
>
> e.g. Move object B to List B
>
> I also want to add/remove objects as required to these lists.  Is this
> possible in
> Struts.  I've looked at the struts-layout library on
> http://struts-application-servers.com/
> but it look sto be buggy.  Has anbody actually had any success with
> this?

This is shown in Tiles portal example. Works pretty well for simple
purposes. Look at the place where you can add, delete, change tiles in the
portal setup. You dont have to use tables like struts-layout. You can use
some HTML select lists and some simple JS to manipulate them.

> I also want to be able to display a tree component to a user and allow
> the user to
> manipulate the tree by adding or removing nodes to the tree.  Is this
> possible with
> any of the struts user interface components or will I have to use an
> applet or a
> sophiticated javascript tree to achieve this.  If so how do I integrate
> it with Struts?

Struts is just another Web application and runs servlets and JSPs. You need
to come up with your own way to intergrate your stuff (JavaScript, Applets)
with it. Struts does not provide you with an IDE. It provides you with a
framwork to make your work easy.

> I've also looked at the monkey-struts example as well but that seems to
> lack the
> creation of objects in these lists, which doesn't look to be a problem
> to implement
> but that might be an oversight on my part : ) please let me know if I'm
> wrong.
>

KB-Monkey-example uses a fixed object model (i.e it knows what fields are
there in each object). However I think if you want the tree to be dynamic
you can use the same technique with your own object model (which seems to be
dynamic in content). The key to adding and deleting the nodes is the way the
button clicks of "Add" and "Delete" are handled in a nested environment.
Nested tags enable you to remember the context of added and deleted
objects/nodes. You can use Map-backed properties for dynamic form-fields.

But one issue with the monkey example is that it refreshes the page if I
want to add/delete an object/node. Wouldn't it be more efficient to use
JavaScript for the purpose? I mean why resend the request back to the server
if you only want to add "blank" fields? If anybody has accomplished this I
would be glad to know.

> I know there's a lot of questions abou the above and I'm still pondering
> them as well
> myself but I just wanted to know whether it is possible to do this in
> Struts at present.
> From what I can see it is possible to create simple web based
> applications using
> Struts but I haven't come across any really complicated web interfaces
> yet using
> Struts, has anybody got any ideas on this or any examples of web
> applications that
> are a little more compicated.

> Many thanks,
> Jon Holloway.
>

If you find any such resource please let us know.

Regards,

Affan


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: