Re: Facelet Question
On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 19:14 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: I have project based on JSF 1.1 (MyFaces), Tiles and Tomahawk (1.1.5) I think about migration to JSF 1.2 and adding some new features and somehow to move my layouts subsystem to another system. How you consider - Facelets + MYFaces 1.2.1 would be worth in this case? JSF1.2 is definitely better than JSF1.1. When using JSF1.1, Facelets is *much* better than JSP. When using JSF1,2, JSP and Facelets are pretty much equal IMO. Facelets does give better error messages but the support for JSP is more mature in IDEs (as the earlier messages in this thread show). Regards, Simon
Re: Facelet Question
Simon, what you know and think about layouts in Facelets? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 19:14 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: I have project based on JSF 1.1 (MyFaces), Tiles and Tomahawk (1.1.5) I think about migration to JSF 1.2 and adding some new features and somehow to move my layouts subsystem to another system. How you consider - Facelets + MYFaces 1.2.1 would be worth in this case? JSF1.2 is definitely better than JSF1.1. When using JSF1.1, Facelets is *much* better than JSP. When using JSF1,2, JSP and Facelets are pretty much equal IMO. Facelets does give better error messages but the support for JSP is more mature in IDEs (as the earlier messages in this thread show). Regards, Simon
Re: Facelet Question
Layouts? You mean the composition stuff? I think it is very nice. It is also much like Tiles. And as you note below, you are already using tiles with JSF. I believe that recent additions to tomahawk improve tiles support in JSF even further. Note that I haven't used tiles+jsf together myself. I'd be happy to hear about pros/cons of this with respect to facelets compositions. Regards, Simon On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 20:23 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: Simon, what you know and think about layouts in Facelets? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 19:14 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: I have project based on JSF 1.1 (MyFaces), Tiles and Tomahawk (1.1.5) I think about migration to JSF 1.2 and adding some new features and somehow to move my layouts subsystem to another system. How you consider - Facelets + MYFaces 1.2.1 would be worth in this case? JSF1.2 is definitely better than JSF1.1. When using JSF1.1, Facelets is *much* better than JSP. When using JSF1,2, JSP and Facelets are pretty much equal IMO. Facelets does give better error messages but the support for JSP is more mature in IDEs (as the earlier messages in this thread show). Regards, Simon
Re: Facelet Question
Hmm, good idea about comparison... I will try. But what I don't like in tiles - separate config, in Stripes ( action-based framework) you just define layout in one JSP and in any particular page just substitute some components in base layout - as for me very good approach, you don't have to support many config files. It seems that you prefer JSF 1.2 to Facelets, am I wrong? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Layouts? You mean the composition stuff? I think it is very nice. It is also much like Tiles. And as you note below, you are already using tiles with JSF. I believe that recent additions to tomahawk improve tiles support in JSF even further. Note that I haven't used tiles+jsf together myself. I'd be happy to hear about pros/cons of this with respect to facelets compositions. Regards, Simon On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 20:23 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: Simon, what you know and think about layouts in Facelets? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 19:14 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: I have project based on JSF 1.1 (MyFaces), Tiles and Tomahawk (1.1.5) I think about migration to JSF 1.2 and adding some new features and somehow to move my layouts subsystem to another system. How you consider - Facelets + MYFaces 1.2.1 would be worth in this case? JSF1.2 is definitely better than JSF1.1. When using JSF1.1, Facelets is *much* better than JSP. When using JSF1,2, JSP and Facelets are pretty much equal IMO. Facelets does give better error messages but the support for JSP is more mature in IDEs (as the earlier messages in this thread show). Regards, Simon
Re: Facelet Question
The layout in Facelets is similar (if you got your last comment right) foo.xhtml: ui:composition xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xmlns:ui=http://java.sun.com/jsf/facelets; ... template=WEB-INF/masterLayout.xhtml ui:define name=menu blah... this overrides the menu... /ui:define ui:define name=masterContent blah... this overrides the main content... /ui:define /ui:composition So... the foo.xhtml is just a simple layout client. -M On Jan 4, 2008 9:31 PM, Anton Gavazuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, good idea about comparison... I will try. But what I don't like in tiles - separate config, in Stripes ( action-based framework) you just define layout in one JSP and in any particular page just substitute some components in base layout - as for me very good approach, you don't have to support many config files. It seems that you prefer JSF 1.2 to Facelets, am I wrong? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Layouts? You mean the composition stuff? I think it is very nice. It is also much like Tiles. And as you note below, you are already using tiles with JSF. I believe that recent additions to tomahawk improve tiles support in JSF even further. Note that I haven't used tiles+jsf together myself. I'd be happy to hear about pros/cons of this with respect to facelets compositions. Regards, Simon On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 20:23 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: Simon, what you know and think about layouts in Facelets? 2008/1/4, simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 19:14 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: I have project based on JSF 1.1 (MyFaces), Tiles and Tomahawk (1.1.5) I think about migration to JSF 1.2 and adding some new features and somehow to move my layouts subsystem to another system. How you consider - Facelets + MYFaces 1.2.1 would be worth in this case? JSF1.2 is definitely better than JSF1.1. When using JSF1.1, Facelets is *much* better than JSP. When using JSF1,2, JSP and Facelets are pretty much equal IMO. Facelets does give better error messages but the support for JSP is more mature in IDEs (as the earlier messages in this thread show). Regards, Simon -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: Facelet Question
On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 22:31 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: Hmm, good idea about comparison... I will try. But what I don't like in tiles - separate config, in Stripes ( action-based framework) you just define layout in one JSP and in any particular page just substitute some components in base layout - as for me very good approach, you don't have to support many config files. It seems that you prefer JSF 1.2 to Facelets, am I wrong? No, I think that Facelets is fine. The main project I work on uses Facelets, and I'm perfectly happy with it. I guess I'm just a little put off by what seems to me to be over-hype of Facelets sometimes. It was *far* better than JSF1.1+JSP, but doesn't seem to me to hold a great edge over JSF1.2+JSP. The pain of getting Facelets auto-complete working with Eclipse put me off a bit, but that will get better over time. Getting the taglibs set up for JSF extension libraries can be awkward if the lib doesn't natively support Facelets (eg MyFaces Tomahawk). And having dived into the Facelets code, the complete lack of comments (and apparent community) is not encouraging. But Facelets does work well. The templating is elegant (though not terribly original). Not having an ugly code-generation step (jsp-java) is nice. It seems to me that people now have two reasonably good choices; neither is perfect but neither is bad. Regards, Simon
RE: Facelet Question
Converting to Facelets is pretty painless, since the syntax is standard XML and it uses the same tags as JSP. If your old project warrants new development, Id go for it. ~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action http://www.virtua.com/ http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring http://www.jsfcentral.com/ http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info From: Carlos Adolfo Ortiz Quiros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 9:15 AM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Facelet Question Is Facelet worth using for a new Project or old one? I am having an old project in JSF, but don't know if facelet is the choice. If I have many pages in an old project, it is easy or hard the conversion to Facelet. CARLOS ADOLFO ORTIZ Q Ingeniero de Desarrollo TRÉBOL Software S.A. Tel : (574)3110663 Fax : (574)3113474 Dirección Cll 16 # 28-195 Medellín - Colombia http://www.trebol.com.co/ http://www.trebol.com.co La información de este mensaje y sus anexos son propiedad exclusiva de TRÉBOL Software S.A. Es únicamente para el uso del destinatario intencional y pueden contener información de carácter privado o confidencial. Le informamos que cualquier revisión, retransmisión, divulgación, copia o uso indebido del mismo está estrictamente prohibida y será sancionada legalmente. Information contained in this message and every attachment is property of TREBOL Software S.A. Only the destiny user is able to make use of the data here contained, which is private and/or confidential. Any revision, broadcasting, spreading, copy or illegal use of this information is strictly prohibited and will be sanctioned by legal means.
RE: Facelet Question
Or just upgrade to JSF1.2 and stay with JSP. JSF1.1+Facelets is vastly superior to JSF1.1+JSP. But I don't see any major difference between JSF1.2+facelets and JSF1.2+JSP+tomahawk+tiles2 Or is there something I've missed? Regards, Simon Kito D. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Converting to Facelets is pretty painless, since the syntax is standard XML and it uses the same tags as JSP. If your old project warrants new development, Id go for it. ~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action http://www.virtua.com/ http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring http://www.jsfcentral.com/ http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info From: Carlos Adolfo Ortiz Quiros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 9:15 AM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Facelet Question Is Facelet worth using for a new Project or old one? I am having an old project in JSF, but don't know if facelet is the choice. If I have many pages in an old project, it is easy or hard the conversion to Facelet.
RE: Facelet Question
Quite interesting. In which position is Tomahawk library with JSF versions? Why do you mention JSF1.2+facelets and JSF1.2+JSP+tomahawk+tiles2 What is the point here? -Mensaje original- De: Simon Kitching [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:23 AM Para: MyFaces Discussion Asunto: RE: Facelet Question Or just upgrade to JSF1.2 and stay with JSP. JSF1.1+Facelets is vastly superior to JSF1.1+JSP. But I don't see any major difference between JSF1.2+facelets and JSF1.2+JSP+tomahawk+tiles2 Or is there something I've missed? Regards, Simon Kito D. Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Converting to Facelets is pretty painless, since the syntax is standard XML and it uses the same tags as JSP. If your old project warrants new development, I'd go for it. ~~~ Kito D. Mann - Author, JavaServer Faces in Action http://www.virtua.com/ http://www.virtua.com - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring http://www.jsfcentral.com/ http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info From: Carlos Adolfo Ortiz Quiros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 9:15 AM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Facelet Question Is Facelet worth using for a new Project or old one? I am having an old project in JSF, but don't know if facelet is the choice. If I have many pages in an old project, it is easy or hard the conversion to Facelet. La información de este mensaje y sus anexos son propiedad exclusiva de TRÉBOL Software S.A. Es únicamente para el uso del destinatario intencional y pueden contener información de carácter privado o confidencial. Le informamos que cualquier revisión, retransmisión, divulgación, copia o uso indebido del mismo está estrictamente prohibida y será sancionada legalmente. Information contained in this message and every attachment is property of TREBOL Software S.A. Only the destiny user is able to make use of the data here contained, which is private and/or confidential. Any revision, broadcasting, spreading, copy or illegal use of this information is strictly prohibited and will be sanctioned by legal means.
Re: Facelet Question
On a related note, the JBoss plugins for Eclipse now provide autocomplete etc for Facelets pages..thanks JBoss! I think the Eclipse folks are working on that as well! Regards, Simon -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
RE: Facelet Question
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:38 -0500, Carlos Adolfo Ortiz Quiros wrote: Quite interesting. In which position is Tomahawk library with JSF versions? The company I work for has several applications in production right now with Myfaces1.2 + tomahawk. Why do you mention JSF1.2+facelets and JSF1.2+JSP+tomahawk+tiles2 What is the point here? Facelets has two major features: It solves the JSF1.1+JSP problem that on first view of a page each component is rendered immediately after it is created. This causes all sorts of problems because a component cannot refer to another one later in the page. Instead, facelets first builds all the components in the page then performs a second pass to render them. However JSF1.2+JSP also does the two-pass approach (inspired by facelets I believe). It provides a clever composition mechanism to allow a page to be built out of pieces (eg a header section, a main section and a footer section). JSF1.1 has no equivalent; the only option is jsp:include, but that is really very primitive. Facelet's composition feature was heavily influenced by the Tiles library (part of Apache Struts). In the past it was not easy to get JSF and Tiles to work together. But now the Tiles library is independent of Struts (tiles2) and support has just been added to Tomahawk trunk to allow tiles2 to work with JSF. So although Facelets is still a very good library, the two main features can now also be achieved without moving away from JSP (or will be once the next Tomahawk release is out, which is hopefully soon). Facelets does have some other cool features, but on the other hand JSP is more familiar to many developers, and IDE support for JSP taglibs is currently better than Facelets support. On a related note, the JBoss plugins for Eclipse now provide autocomplete etc for Facelets pages..thanks JBoss! Regards, Simon
RE: Facelet Question
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthias Wessendorf Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 3:01 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: Facelet Question On a related note, the JBoss plugins for Eclipse now provide autocomplete etc for Facelets pages..thanks JBoss! I think the Eclipse folks are working on that as well! Yeah, and this has been a part of Exadel Studio (which is being integrated into JBossTools) for a while. Regards, Simon -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: Facelet Question
On Dec 6, 2007 11:23 AM, Simon Kitching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I don't see any major difference between JSF1.2+facelets and JSF1.2+JSP+tomahawk+tiles2 Or is there something I've missed? Error reporting is vastly superior when you stop using jsp. Facelets is also significantly fast. Search the archives for performance comparisons. The only thing jsp has going for it is that it's considered a standard outside of JSF, which might be a consideration if you have to use jsp tags. However, I'm pretty sure you can now use jsp snippets inside of facelets if you have to these days.
Re: Facelet Question
Kito D. Mann wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthias Wessendorf Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 3:01 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: Facelet Question On a related note, the JBoss plugins for Eclipse now provide autocomplete etc for Facelets pages..thanks JBoss! I think the Eclipse folks are working on that as well! Yeah, and this has been a part of Exadel Studio (which is being integrated into JBossTools) for a while. Netbeans 5.5.x and 6.0 too. Regards, Simon -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
Re: Facelet Question
And IntelliJ 7 On 07/12/2007, Luka Surija [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kito D. Mann wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthias Wessendorf Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 3:01 PM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: Facelet Question On a related note, the JBoss plugins for Eclipse now provide autocomplete etc for Facelets pages..thanks JBoss! I think the Eclipse folks are working on that as well! Yeah, and this has been a part of Exadel Studio (which is being integrated into JBossTools) for a while. Netbeans 5.5.x and 6.0 too. Regards, Simon -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
