Re: [T5] improve documentation
Em Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:17:29 -0300, Angelo Turetta escreveu: I think what you ask is feasible: it's not that different from what is done by BeanEditForm, just the source of the field list is not determined by reflection but loaded from an external source. I agree it would be a nice addition to T5, but it has not been done yet. It is not just feasible, it's already implemented: use a BeanEditForm or BeanEditor and pass them a BeanModel instance built and configured programatically (i.e. removing or adding properties to the BeanModel based on any logic you want). Maybe nobody commented on the suggestion made in http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList?action=diff&rev2=98&rev1=94 and also posted in this list because it was not well written. I just understood that after reading Angelo's message. -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
It is 1:1 the text from the mailing list as far as I remember..just with a formatted table on the Wiki. So you mean it could work by extending BeanEdit Form? Anyway, so I think, considering the time to do this, it was a good decision to use Wicket for this part and T5 for the frontend part...so combining the best of both worldsotherwise it would have taken too long. Maybe I replace this later on by T5 too if this should become a feature of T5 I am not a T5 developer, just a casual T5 "user" - I can only contribute by making suggestions and pointing out stuff I have noticed... Thanks for your reply > For others' reference, your addition is: > http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList?action=diff&rev2=98&rev1=94 > > I think what you ask is feasible: it's not that different from what is > done by BeanEditForm, just the source of the field list is not > determined by reflection but loaded from an external source. > I agree it would be a nice addition to T5, but it has not been done yet. > > The point is: you are asking for a new feature (and a large one, I 'd > say), so you cannot expect a simple answer on the mailing list. Look at > JIRA improvement issues, to find out whether this has already been > requested by someone else. If not, submit a new Issue, describing with > the greatest detail how the new feature should work. Then you can ask > the mailing list to vote for your issue, and ask the developers to > consider it. Or if you feel brave enough, write it yourself and submit > it for inclusion. > > That's how things are done in OS projects... > > Angelo. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
superoverdr...@gmx.de wrote: I have put it on the Wish List are there does not seem to be a solution yet? It's not actually evident what you added to that page, given superoverdrive <> Toby. For others' reference, your addition is: http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList?action=diff&rev2=98&rev1=94 I think what you ask is feasible: it's not that different from what is done by BeanEditForm, just the source of the field list is not determined by reflection but loaded from an external source. I agree it would be a nice addition to T5, but it has not been done yet. The point is: you are asking for a new feature (and a large one, I 'd say), so you cannot expect a simple answer on the mailing list. Look at JIRA improvement issues, to find out whether this has already been requested by someone else. If not, submit a new Issue, describing with the greatest detail how the new feature should work. Then you can ask the mailing list to vote for your issue, and ask the developers to consider it. Or if you feel brave enough, write it yourself and submit it for inclusion. That's how things are done in OS projects... Angelo. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
> Be sure it is well written. Sometimes there are some messages so badly > written or so vague that people just don't take the time to even > understand them. I think this should be clearly written: http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList?highlight=(wishlist) I have put it on the Wish List are there does not seem to be a solution yet? > > This is why I ended up doing the backend in Wicket and the frontend in > > Tapestry > > !?!?!? Being Wicket and Tapestry front-end frameworks (web ones), how > could you write the backend in Wicket? Backend = the admin interface to configure the front-end...e.g. define the fields that exist, what form fields should be displayed. This was easy to do in Wicket but is hard /impossible(?) in Tapestry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Em Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:15:11 -0300, Tobias Marx escreveu: Yes, but Screencasts only show you easy examples you can do those do what you see in those screencasts and it works wonderfullybut then you want to move on and change something, e.g. additional columns in a table or depending on user roles, locales depending on the domain, you want to change the look of certain components, you might want to change URLs when sorting a table to be stateless and SEO-friendly.and there is an endless number of things people want to do and modify those "simply" examples. That's what a cookbook is good for. Howard started one in the Tapestry page. we all could add more examples to the wiki, so Howard or any other Tapestry committer could review and add them to the page. ;) -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Em Wed, 21 Jan 2009 12:03:04 -0300, Tobias Marx escreveu: I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point with "no solution" and resorted to another framework as they were in a hurry to "get it done". Did these people post their questions in the mailing list? Once I posted one (about Run Jetty Run) and got a response (and a very good one) in 9 minutes! For instance I asked a question on the mailing list with no answer so I assume there is no answer? Be sure it is well written. Sometimes there are some messages so badly written or so vague that people just don't take the time to even understand them. This is why I ended up doing the backend in Wicket and the frontend in Tapestry !?!?!? Being Wicket and Tapestry front-end frameworks (web ones), how could you write the backend in Wicket? -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Yes, but Screencasts only show you easy examples you can do those do what you see in those screencasts and it works wonderfullybut then you want to move on and change something, e.g. additional columns in a table or depending on user roles, locales depending on the domain, you want to change the look of certain components, you might want to change URLs when sorting a table to be stateless and SEO-friendly.and there is an endless number of things people want to do and modify those "simply" examples. Then it get's messy and you are stuck because you won't find any documentation on this or some essential questions are not answers. Ok, many of those examples from before are documented somewhere...but others aren't. If you ask on the mailing list, you sometimes get an answers of the core developers who know it - but there is often only 2 or 3 people on this planet how know how to do it and they have never documented it as they expect all users to go through the source code - but going through the source code of a big framework is not the reason why people want to use frameworks. They want to use frameworks to "not bother" about the details, they just want to save time by using a framework that helps to solve problems faster and expect it to work in a nice and simple way - otherwise you might just do it yourself or with a different technology/framework/language that is either documented in a better way or easier to use. It is nice to do things in 5 minutes instead of 1 hour - but if you end up going through the source code in 8 hours to find out who to do something in 5 minutes, doing it the "old fasioned way" in 1 hour is sometimes quicker. Original-Nachricht > Datum: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:58:52 +0200 (EET) > Von: Peter Stavrinides > An: Tapestry users > Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point > with "no solution" and resorted to another framework > I reached that point when it was announced that T5 would not be backward > compatible with T4... at that point I had invested a couple of years in > Tapestry, and was maintaining and actively developing a number of production > apps so was caught in a conundrum... to cut a long story though, the ONLY > reason back then that I stuck with Tapestry was because of Howards > screencasts, Tapestry 5 just seemed awesome in those screencasts and sold it > to me so > I gave it a try and got hooked, I guess nothing is more powerful than a > visual tutorial. It saves time, saves frustration and walks you through best > practices so you do it the right way first time round... its a real pity > they are not being pushed more! > > Peter > > - Original Message - > From: "Tobias Marx" > To: users@tapestry.apache.org > Sent: Wednesday, 21 January, 2009 17:03:04 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, > Bucharest, Istanbul > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > In the long-term it is better though if every developer provides an > example to the code he has done. > This way the community grows and also the number of potential > developers...even if new developments and bugfixes take longer. > > I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point > with "no solution" and resorted to another framework as they were in a hurry > to "get it done". > > So the Tapestry community shrinks as well although new people find the > framework and look at itso overall the community forws, but the community > could grow a lot quicker if less people would get frustrated by it. > > For instance I asked a question on the mailing list with no answer so I > assume there is no answer? > So I have put it on the http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList - > althouth other developers have the same question. If there is no answer or > feedback you never know whether there is no solution or whether there is only > nobody that knows the solution. > > This is why I ended up doing the backend in Wicket and the frontend in > Tapestry > > > Original-Nachricht > > Datum: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:40:15 +0200 (EET) > > Von: Peter Stavrinides > > An: Tapestry users > > Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > > >Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement > > Absolutely! > > > > Tapestry is community driven with a small team of developers... they > have > > limited time and simply can't do it all. The documentation task should > be > > given to the community and done Wiki style. There are many people > answering > > questions on this list who are not committers, the docs would be vastly > &g
Re: [T5] improve documentation
> I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point with > "no solution" and resorted to another framework I reached that point when it was announced that T5 would not be backward compatible with T4... at that point I had invested a couple of years in Tapestry, and was maintaining and actively developing a number of production apps so was caught in a conundrum... to cut a long story though, the ONLY reason back then that I stuck with Tapestry was because of Howards screencasts, Tapestry 5 just seemed awesome in those screencasts and sold it to me so I gave it a try and got hooked, I guess nothing is more powerful than a visual tutorial. It saves time, saves frustration and walks you through best practices so you do it the right way first time round... its a real pity they are not being pushed more! Peter - Original Message - From: "Tobias Marx" To: users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, 21 January, 2009 17:03:04 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, Bucharest, Istanbul Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation In the long-term it is better though if every developer provides an example to the code he has done. This way the community grows and also the number of potential developers...even if new developments and bugfixes take longer. I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point with "no solution" and resorted to another framework as they were in a hurry to "get it done". So the Tapestry community shrinks as well although new people find the framework and look at itso overall the community forws, but the community could grow a lot quicker if less people would get frustrated by it. For instance I asked a question on the mailing list with no answer so I assume there is no answer? So I have put it on the http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList - althouth other developers have the same question. If there is no answer or feedback you never know whether there is no solution or whether there is only nobody that knows the solution. This is why I ended up doing the backend in Wicket and the frontend in Tapestry Original-Nachricht > Datum: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:40:15 +0200 (EET) > Von: Peter Stavrinides > An: Tapestry users > Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > >Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement > Absolutely! > > Tapestry is community driven with a small team of developers... they have > limited time and simply can't do it all. The documentation task should be > given to the community and done Wiki style. There are many people answering > questions on this list who are not committers, the docs would be vastly > improved with their collective input. > > Cheers > Peter > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ulrich Stärk" > To: "Tapestry users" > Sent: Wednesday, 21 January, 2009 16:24:20 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, > Bucharest, Istanbul > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > I don't think that someone has to be appointed to do it. Everyone can > contribute by writing an improvement, opening an issue in JIRA and > attaching the improvement to it. > > As to the book you mentioned, I think the initiative came to a halt > again, shortly after it was started. > > Uli > > Newham, Cameron schrieb: > > I think we are all in agreement that the documentation needs a radical > overhaul (and lots to be written). > > > > The next question is, who is going to do it? > > > > A while ago someone proposed a book on T5. A small group from here > organised a separate discussion group and went off to work on it (I have no > idea > how it is going. Does anyone know?) > > > > Maybe a similar thing should be done w.r.t this current issue? > > > > c. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Borut Bolčina [mailto:borut.bolc...@gmail.com] > > Sent: 21 January 2009 08:58 > > To: Tapestry users > > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > > > Hi, > > > > also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP > > applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph > > clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application > or > > do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", > "How > > to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... > > > > A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations > on > > the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly > improve > > the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel > &
Re: [T5] improve documentation
In the long-term it is better though if every developer provides an example to the code he has done. This way the community grows and also the number of potential developers...even if new developments and bugfixes take longer. I know many people who have started with Tapestry, but reached a point with "no solution" and resorted to another framework as they were in a hurry to "get it done". So the Tapestry community shrinks as well although new people find the framework and look at itso overall the community forws, but the community could grow a lot quicker if less people would get frustrated by it. For instance I asked a question on the mailing list with no answer so I assume there is no answer? So I have put it on the http://wiki.apache.org/tapestry/WishList - althouth other developers have the same question. If there is no answer or feedback you never know whether there is no solution or whether there is only nobody that knows the solution. This is why I ended up doing the backend in Wicket and the frontend in Tapestry Original-Nachricht > Datum: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:40:15 +0200 (EET) > Von: Peter Stavrinides > An: Tapestry users > Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > >Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement > Absolutely! > > Tapestry is community driven with a small team of developers... they have > limited time and simply can't do it all. The documentation task should be > given to the community and done Wiki style. There are many people answering > questions on this list who are not committers, the docs would be vastly > improved with their collective input. > > Cheers > Peter > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ulrich Stärk" > To: "Tapestry users" > Sent: Wednesday, 21 January, 2009 16:24:20 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, > Bucharest, Istanbul > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > I don't think that someone has to be appointed to do it. Everyone can > contribute by writing an improvement, opening an issue in JIRA and > attaching the improvement to it. > > As to the book you mentioned, I think the initiative came to a halt > again, shortly after it was started. > > Uli > > Newham, Cameron schrieb: > > I think we are all in agreement that the documentation needs a radical > overhaul (and lots to be written). > > > > The next question is, who is going to do it? > > > > A while ago someone proposed a book on T5. A small group from here > organised a separate discussion group and went off to work on it (I have no > idea > how it is going. Does anyone know?) > > > > Maybe a similar thing should be done w.r.t this current issue? > > > > c. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Borut Bolčina [mailto:borut.bolc...@gmail.com] > > Sent: 21 January 2009 08:58 > > To: Tapestry users > > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > > > Hi, > > > > also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP > > applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph > > clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application > or > > do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", > "How > > to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... > > > > A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations > on > > the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly > improve > > the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel > > tapestry is missing the scope in the market. It is not advertised in any > > way, nor as a framework which one can use to quickly make a simple news > > site, as other frameworks (non java) are better at that (so I hear), nor > as > > a framework which is best for large teams and large applications. Just > look > > at the web page for Zend PHP framework (http://www.zend.com). Which page > do > > you think management like more, zend's or tapestry's? Unfortunately > > sometimes (too often) the arguments of power outweight the power of > > arguments and the consequence is, well, "We will use the framework which > has > > more flashy homepage!". > > > > The community, us, must prove that a simple web application (some forms, > > administration pages, publishing news, social "crap", etc) can be done > > without having a PhD in Computer Science. Tapestry relies much on > convention > > over configuration paradigm, that is why the documentation must be
Re: [T5] improve documentation
>Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement Absolutely! Tapestry is community driven with a small team of developers... they have limited time and simply can't do it all. The documentation task should be given to the community and done Wiki style. There are many people answering questions on this list who are not committers, the docs would be vastly improved with their collective input. Cheers Peter - Original Message - From: "Ulrich Stärk" To: "Tapestry users" Sent: Wednesday, 21 January, 2009 16:24:20 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, Bucharest, Istanbul Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation I don't think that someone has to be appointed to do it. Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement, opening an issue in JIRA and attaching the improvement to it. As to the book you mentioned, I think the initiative came to a halt again, shortly after it was started. Uli Newham, Cameron schrieb: > I think we are all in agreement that the documentation needs a radical > overhaul (and lots to be written). > > The next question is, who is going to do it? > > A while ago someone proposed a book on T5. A small group from here organised > a separate discussion group and went off to work on it (I have no idea how it > is going. Does anyone know?) > > Maybe a similar thing should be done w.r.t this current issue? > > c. > > > -Original Message- > From: Borut Bolčina [mailto:borut.bolc...@gmail.com] > Sent: 21 January 2009 08:58 > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > Hi, > > also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP > applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph > clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application or > do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", "How > to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... > > A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations on > the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly improve > the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel > tapestry is missing the scope in the market. It is not advertised in any > way, nor as a framework which one can use to quickly make a simple news > site, as other frameworks (non java) are better at that (so I hear), nor as > a framework which is best for large teams and large applications. Just look > at the web page for Zend PHP framework (http://www.zend.com). Which page do > you think management like more, zend's or tapestry's? Unfortunately > sometimes (too often) the arguments of power outweight the power of > arguments and the consequence is, well, "We will use the framework which has > more flashy homepage!". > > The community, us, must prove that a simple web application (some forms, > administration pages, publishing news, social "crap", etc) can be done > without having a PhD in Computer Science. Tapestry relies much on convention > over configuration paradigm, that is why the documentation must be excelent. > Say, for example > http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-core/ref/org/apache/tapestry5/corelib/components/Form.html. > This page is clearly frightening - look at the first paragraph. So many > events and none/few of them has a decent explanation/usage scenario/example. > IMO all of them should be properly documented or not mentioned at all. > > The authorization should have a chapter! Tapestry is a very powerful > framework and as such the same thing can be done differently, BUT...why > should one have to spend days/weeks to implement a decent > authentication/authorization system? There should be a guide for common > scenarios like form based authentication. Of course one can hunt for example > projects and study the guts of them, which in the end is very rewarding, but > time consuming. Newcomers should have clear goals on how to implement such > things, without jumping to the wiki and other places and fighting the > dependency incompatibilities. > > > -Borut > > 2009/1/13 Ulrich Stärk > >> Hi all, >> >> Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost >> everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. >> Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus >> making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. >> Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking >> for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no >> guide in the actual sense of the word but mere
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I don't think that someone has to be appointed to do it. Everyone can contribute by writing an improvement, opening an issue in JIRA and attaching the improvement to it. As to the book you mentioned, I think the initiative came to a halt again, shortly after it was started. Uli Newham, Cameron schrieb: I think we are all in agreement that the documentation needs a radical overhaul (and lots to be written). The next question is, who is going to do it? A while ago someone proposed a book on T5. A small group from here organised a separate discussion group and went off to work on it (I have no idea how it is going. Does anyone know?) Maybe a similar thing should be done w.r.t this current issue? c. -Original Message- From: Borut Bolčina [mailto:borut.bolc...@gmail.com] Sent: 21 January 2009 08:58 To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation Hi, also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application or do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", "How to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations on the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly improve the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel tapestry is missing the scope in the market. It is not advertised in any way, nor as a framework which one can use to quickly make a simple news site, as other frameworks (non java) are better at that (so I hear), nor as a framework which is best for large teams and large applications. Just look at the web page for Zend PHP framework (http://www.zend.com). Which page do you think management like more, zend's or tapestry's? Unfortunately sometimes (too often) the arguments of power outweight the power of arguments and the consequence is, well, "We will use the framework which has more flashy homepage!". The community, us, must prove that a simple web application (some forms, administration pages, publishing news, social "crap", etc) can be done without having a PhD in Computer Science. Tapestry relies much on convention over configuration paradigm, that is why the documentation must be excelent. Say, for example http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-core/ref/org/apache/tapestry5/corelib/components/Form.html. This page is clearly frightening - look at the first paragraph. So many events and none/few of them has a decent explanation/usage scenario/example. IMO all of them should be properly documented or not mentioned at all. The authorization should have a chapter! Tapestry is a very powerful framework and as such the same thing can be done differently, BUT...why should one have to spend days/weeks to implement a decent authentication/authorization system? There should be a guide for common scenarios like form based authentication. Of course one can hunt for example projects and study the guts of them, which in the end is very rewarding, but time consuming. Newcomers should have clear goals on how to implement such things, without jumping to the wiki and other places and fighting the dependency incompatibilities. -Borut 2009/1/13 Ulrich Stärk Hi all, Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not mentioned in the documentation but at
RE: [T5] improve documentation
I think we are all in agreement that the documentation needs a radical overhaul (and lots to be written). The next question is, who is going to do it? A while ago someone proposed a book on T5. A small group from here organised a separate discussion group and went off to work on it (I have no idea how it is going. Does anyone know?) Maybe a similar thing should be done w.r.t this current issue? c. -Original Message- From: Borut Bolčina [mailto:borut.bolc...@gmail.com] Sent: 21 January 2009 08:58 To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation Hi, also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application or do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", "How to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations on the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly improve the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel tapestry is missing the scope in the market. It is not advertised in any way, nor as a framework which one can use to quickly make a simple news site, as other frameworks (non java) are better at that (so I hear), nor as a framework which is best for large teams and large applications. Just look at the web page for Zend PHP framework (http://www.zend.com). Which page do you think management like more, zend's or tapestry's? Unfortunately sometimes (too often) the arguments of power outweight the power of arguments and the consequence is, well, "We will use the framework which has more flashy homepage!". The community, us, must prove that a simple web application (some forms, administration pages, publishing news, social "crap", etc) can be done without having a PhD in Computer Science. Tapestry relies much on convention over configuration paradigm, that is why the documentation must be excelent. Say, for example http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-core/ref/org/apache/tapestry5/corelib/components/Form.html. This page is clearly frightening - look at the first paragraph. So many events and none/few of them has a decent explanation/usage scenario/example. IMO all of them should be properly documented or not mentioned at all. The authorization should have a chapter! Tapestry is a very powerful framework and as such the same thing can be done differently, BUT...why should one have to spend days/weeks to implement a decent authentication/authorization system? There should be a guide for common scenarios like form based authentication. Of course one can hunt for example projects and study the guts of them, which in the end is very rewarding, but time consuming. Newcomers should have clear goals on how to implement such things, without jumping to the wiki and other places and fighting the dependency incompatibilities. -Borut 2009/1/13 Ulrich Stärk > Hi all, > > Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus > making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. > Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking > for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no > guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics > using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started > with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to > look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a > subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous > examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is > the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific > component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use > cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to > have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain > component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. > This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static > Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not > mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the > solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate > component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly that > use case. But
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Hi, also a guide/recipes/good practices/tips/chapter for converting JSP applications to Tapestry 5 would be very welcome. At least a paragraph clarifying questions like: "Can I have JSPs in my Tapestry 5 application or do I have to have two web applications talking somehow to each other?", "How to post a form from JSP to a Tapestry page or vice versa?", ... A guide on clustering. I know this info can be found in many locations on the net, but writing it in Tapestry documentation would imho greatly improve the credibility of the framework for "serious" web applications. I feel tapestry is missing the scope in the market. It is not advertised in any way, nor as a framework which one can use to quickly make a simple news site, as other frameworks (non java) are better at that (so I hear), nor as a framework which is best for large teams and large applications. Just look at the web page for Zend PHP framework (http://www.zend.com). Which page do you think management like more, zend's or tapestry's? Unfortunately sometimes (too often) the arguments of power outweight the power of arguments and the consequence is, well, "We will use the framework which has more flashy homepage!". The community, us, must prove that a simple web application (some forms, administration pages, publishing news, social "crap", etc) can be done without having a PhD in Computer Science. Tapestry relies much on convention over configuration paradigm, that is why the documentation must be excelent. Say, for example http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/tapestry-core/ref/org/apache/tapestry5/corelib/components/Form.html. This page is clearly frightening - look at the first paragraph. So many events and none/few of them has a decent explanation/usage scenario/example. IMO all of them should be properly documented or not mentioned at all. The authorization should have a chapter! Tapestry is a very powerful framework and as such the same thing can be done differently, BUT...why should one have to spend days/weeks to implement a decent authentication/authorization system? There should be a guide for common scenarios like form based authentication. Of course one can hunt for example projects and study the guts of them, which in the end is very rewarding, but time consuming. Newcomers should have clear goals on how to implement such things, without jumping to the wiki and other places and fighting the dependency incompatibilities. -Borut 2009/1/13 Ulrich Stärk > Hi all, > > Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus > making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. > Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking > for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no > guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics > using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started > with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to > look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a > subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous > examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is > the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific > component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use > cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to > have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain > component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. > This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static > Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not > mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the > solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate > component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly that > use case. But it seems that the user wasn't able to find it - either he > didn't look at all or more probably, he looked in the wrong place. How could > he possibly know, that the solution to his use case is documented in a > component named Delegate? > Because I think that the current arrangement of the documentation makes it > hard to grasp the concepts of Tapestry, especially for beginners, and to > quickly find the information one seeks, I propose the following steps to be > taken to improve the documentation: > > 1. Re-arrange the current documentation to not just be an alphabetically > ordered list of topics but instead to be some kind of guide to Tapestry. > Group topics that belong together, start with basic topics and end with > advanced ones. > 2. Print
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Totally right in my opinion. Tapestry is not very newbie friendly at first, but when you get a hang of it it beats every other framework I tried out by a large margin. At least for me. But some totally artificial or useless application which is just done to demonstrate all of the features won't help much in my opinion. For these things an application like Jumpstart ist much much better suited. But all tutorials usually do the same things. Blogs, useless apps for managing [insert some simplistic hobby here], Petshop etc. But people and especially beginner will want to write webapplications with it. So why not combine the demonstration with something useful and start with basic building blocks almost every webapp needs? After that the really great work of Jumpstart can be much more easy appreciated. 2009/1/19 Thiago HP > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Otho wrote: > > Jumpstart is great, especially for looking some techniques up and see how > > certain details are done. But does it really suit as a single Tutorial > > application where you go from nil to something useable? > > I think both are very important: a cookbook (like Jumpstart) and an > application building tutorial that begins from step zero (project > creation) to more sophisticated steps like customizing a BeanEditForm. > A cookbook is very good when you already know how to write most > things, but then you find some you don't. An example application would > be more targeted at Tapestry newbies. > > -- > Thiago > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > >
Re: [T5] improve documentation
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Otho wrote: > Jumpstart is great, especially for looking some techniques up and see how > certain details are done. But does it really suit as a single Tutorial > application where you go from nil to something useable? I think both are very important: a cookbook (like Jumpstart) and an application building tutorial that begins from step zero (project creation) to more sophisticated steps like customizing a BeanEditForm. A cookbook is very good when you already know how to write most things, but then you find some you don't. An example application would be more targeted at Tapestry newbies. -- Thiago - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Jumpstart is great, especially for looking some techniques up and see how certain details are done. But does it really suit as a single Tutorial application where you go from nil to something useable? 2009/1/19 Peter Stavrinides > I think Jumpstart covers a lot of ground, and is the quickest and most > efficient way to learn Tapestry (whats more useful than looking at actual > code), its been around for a while, ao its evolution means it documents best > practices. Now that it runs with Jetty, I say use Jumpstart and strip out > anything thats excess (EJB etc). > > Peter > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Geoff Callender" > To: "Tapestry users" > Sent: Sunday, 18 January, 2009 17:16:48 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, > Bucharest, Istanbul > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > I completely agree too. A search facility of the existing site would > be a huge leap forward. > > On 16/01/2009, at 9:23 AM, Szemere Szemere wrote: > > > Completely agree with the sentiments expressed. Too often I've had > > to use > > Google or similar to find what I'm looking for in the Tapestry > > documentation. Having it split across at least 4 different places > > and in > > some places confused with Tapestry4 is awkward. > > Szemere > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > >
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I think Jumpstart covers a lot of ground, and is the quickest and most efficient way to learn Tapestry (whats more useful than looking at actual code), its been around for a while, ao its evolution means it documents best practices. Now that it runs with Jetty, I say use Jumpstart and strip out anything thats excess (EJB etc). Peter - Original Message - From: "Geoff Callender" To: "Tapestry users" Sent: Sunday, 18 January, 2009 17:16:48 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, Bucharest, Istanbul Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation I completely agree too. A search facility of the existing site would be a huge leap forward. On 16/01/2009, at 9:23 AM, Szemere Szemere wrote: > Completely agree with the sentiments expressed. Too often I've had > to use > Google or similar to find what I'm looking for in the Tapestry > documentation. Having it split across at least 4 different places > and in > some places confused with Tapestry4 is awkward. > Szemere - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I completely agree too. A search facility of the existing site would be a huge leap forward. On 16/01/2009, at 9:23 AM, Szemere Szemere wrote: Completely agree with the sentiments expressed. Too often I've had to use Google or similar to find what I'm looking for in the Tapestry documentation. Having it split across at least 4 different places and in some places confused with Tapestry4 is awkward. Szemere - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I would prefer a prototypical community application to start the usual webapp. So user management, registration with email validation and capchas, profiles, user groups, fine grained security, optionally simplistic blogs, forums, pm's and a bit of content management etc. I tend to copy that stuff over from older applications everytime, since it is standard in almost all webapps. Having an archetype for that would definitely also give Tap5 a boost in the hobby programmers section. Sure, this overlaps a bit with appfuse, but appfuse tends to be a bit bloated for smaller projects by virtue of the generalizations made. With the community/user base in place it would be possible to go for full featured community apps and portals or for example to an online shop, stock monitors or whatever. If it would be possible to make it easily skinnable I would think it wouldn't take long before "the community" provides with interesting designs and eyecandy. But maybe this is all a bit far fetched ;) Regards, Otho 2009/1/17 James Hillyerd > I quite like the existing tutorial, I was just disappointed it ended so > abruptly. :) > > I think whatever docs come around in the future, they need to cover more on > Encoders/Translators/Coercers - as that was one of the most difficult > things > for me to learn. Honestly, I still barely understand when to use which. > > -james > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Howard Lewis Ship >wrote: > > > I've been coming to the same conclusion. > > > > I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several > > online articles. > > > > I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of > > Tapestry and be useful to boot. > > > > So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". > > It would replace the tutorial. > > > > > > > > -- > James A. Hillyerd >
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I quite like the existing tutorial, I was just disappointed it ended so abruptly. :) I think whatever docs come around in the future, they need to cover more on Encoders/Translators/Coercers - as that was one of the most difficult things for me to learn. Honestly, I still barely understand when to use which. -james On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > I've been coming to the same conclusion. > > I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several > online articles. > > I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of > Tapestry and be useful to boot. > > So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". > It would replace the tutorial. > > > -- James A. Hillyerd
Re: [T5] improve documentation
Completely agree with the sentiments expressed. Too often I've had to use Google or similar to find what I'm looking for in the Tapestry documentation. Having it split across at least 4 different places and in some places confused with Tapestry4 is awkward. Szemere
Re: [T5] improve documentation
A search on the Tapestry site! I have always wandered why there isn't one? these days its a given. Peter - Original Message - From: superoverdr...@gmx.de To: users@tapestry.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, 14 January, 2009 1:05:50 PM GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, Bucharest, Istanbul Subject: Re: RE: [T5] improve documentation Jumpstart would also be a good idea Original-Nachricht > Datum: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:22:13 - > Von: "Newham, Cameron" > An: "Tapestry users" > Betreff: RE: [T5] improve documentation > I second this. > > I much prefer the "cookbook" approach as opposed to having to wade through > a complete application to find how to do something. > > Jumpstart is excellent and has helped me many times. All it needs is > perhaps a bit more explanation of what's going on, more cases covering > solutions > to common problems, and a bit more filling out. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Andy Pahne [mailto:andy.pa...@googlemail.com] > Sent: 13 January 2009 21:15 > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > > I'd prefer if it were more like jumpstart than petstore. > > Any chance jumpstart becoming part of the framework? > > Andy > > > > superoverdr...@gmx.de schrieb: > > An good old pet-shop application...with lots of Ajax would be nice...or > something similiar. > > > > It could coves common questions on the Tapestry mailing list from the > past > > by providing an example implementation. > > > > Would be good if it also contained one or the other things of the > following list: > > > > - Caching HTML fragments (e.g. expensive database queries) that only > need to be generated > > every 5 minutes or 5 hours. > > > > - Dynamic rendering of form elements (when the configuration is read > from a database, for dynamic > > form field definitions, e.g. in the backend "3 textfields with 50 chars > max, 10 checkboxes with 3 minimum selections.) > > > > - some "common" Ajax/DHTML stuff you see nowadays on most websites..e.g. > > "animations", e.g. imagine you delete a row from a table that dissolves > with a small animation, or combining an Ajax List with autocomplete or > something like this here: > > > > > http://www.interiders.com/2008/02/11/prototextboxlist-meets-autocompletion/ > > > > and stuff like progress bars (e.g. during a search) > > > > Just a few suggestions! > > > > Toby > > > > Original-Nachricht > > > >> Datum: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:15:44 -0800 > >> Von: Howard Lewis Ship > >> An: Tapestry users > >> Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > >> > > > > > >> I've been coming to the same conclusion. > >> > >> I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several > >> online articles. > >> > >> I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of > >> Tapestry and be useful to boot. > >> > >> So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". > >> It would replace the tutorial. > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > >>> everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > >>> Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations > >>> > >> thus > >> > >>> making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get > >>> > >> going. > >> > >>> Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm > >>> > >> looking > >> > >>> for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is > no > >>> guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of > topics > >>> using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > >>> beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you > >>> > >> started > >> > >>> with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic > >>> > >> to > >> > >>> look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information > on
Re: RE: [T5] improve documentation
Jumpstart would also be a good idea Original-Nachricht > Datum: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:22:13 - > Von: "Newham, Cameron" > An: "Tapestry users" > Betreff: RE: [T5] improve documentation > I second this. > > I much prefer the "cookbook" approach as opposed to having to wade through > a complete application to find how to do something. > > Jumpstart is excellent and has helped me many times. All it needs is > perhaps a bit more explanation of what's going on, more cases covering > solutions > to common problems, and a bit more filling out. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Andy Pahne [mailto:andy.pa...@googlemail.com] > Sent: 13 January 2009 21:15 > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation > > > I'd prefer if it were more like jumpstart than petstore. > > Any chance jumpstart becoming part of the framework? > > Andy > > > > superoverdr...@gmx.de schrieb: > > An good old pet-shop application...with lots of Ajax would be nice...or > something similiar. > > > > It could coves common questions on the Tapestry mailing list from the > past > > by providing an example implementation. > > > > Would be good if it also contained one or the other things of the > following list: > > > > - Caching HTML fragments (e.g. expensive database queries) that only > need to be generated > > every 5 minutes or 5 hours. > > > > - Dynamic rendering of form elements (when the configuration is read > from a database, for dynamic > > form field definitions, e.g. in the backend "3 textfields with 50 chars > max, 10 checkboxes with 3 minimum selections.) > > > > - some "common" Ajax/DHTML stuff you see nowadays on most websites..e.g. > > "animations", e.g. imagine you delete a row from a table that dissolves > with a small animation, or combining an Ajax List with autocomplete or > something like this here: > > > > > http://www.interiders.com/2008/02/11/prototextboxlist-meets-autocompletion/ > > > > and stuff like progress bars (e.g. during a search) > > > > Just a few suggestions! > > > > Toby > > > > Original-Nachricht > > > >> Datum: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:15:44 -0800 > >> Von: Howard Lewis Ship > >> An: Tapestry users > >> Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > >> > > > > > >> I've been coming to the same conclusion. > >> > >> I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several > >> online articles. > >> > >> I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of > >> Tapestry and be useful to boot. > >> > >> So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". > >> It would replace the tutorial. > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > >>> everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > >>> Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations > >>> > >> thus > >> > >>> making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get > >>> > >> going. > >> > >>> Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm > >>> > >> looking > >> > >>> for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is > no > >>> guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of > topics > >>> using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > >>> beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you > >>> > >> started > >> > >>> with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic > >>> > >> to > >> > >>> look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information > on > >>> > >> a > >> > >>> subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous > >>> examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly > >>> > >> there is > >> > >>> the component reference
RE: [T5] improve documentation
I second this. I much prefer the "cookbook" approach as opposed to having to wade through a complete application to find how to do something. Jumpstart is excellent and has helped me many times. All it needs is perhaps a bit more explanation of what's going on, more cases covering solutions to common problems, and a bit more filling out. -Original Message- From: Andy Pahne [mailto:andy.pa...@googlemail.com] Sent: 13 January 2009 21:15 To: Tapestry users Subject: Re: [T5] improve documentation I'd prefer if it were more like jumpstart than petstore. Any chance jumpstart becoming part of the framework? Andy superoverdr...@gmx.de schrieb: > An good old pet-shop application...with lots of Ajax would be nice...or > something similiar. > > It could coves common questions on the Tapestry mailing list from the past > by providing an example implementation. > > Would be good if it also contained one or the other things of the following > list: > > - Caching HTML fragments (e.g. expensive database queries) that only need to > be generated > every 5 minutes or 5 hours. > > - Dynamic rendering of form elements (when the configuration is read from a > database, for dynamic > form field definitions, e.g. in the backend "3 textfields with 50 chars max, > 10 checkboxes with 3 minimum selections.) > > - some "common" Ajax/DHTML stuff you see nowadays on most websites..e.g. > "animations", e.g. imagine you delete a row from a table that dissolves with > a small animation, or combining an Ajax List with autocomplete or something > like this here: > > http://www.interiders.com/2008/02/11/prototextboxlist-meets-autocompletion/ > > and stuff like progress bars (e.g. during a search) > > Just a few suggestions! > > Toby > > ---- Original-Nachricht ---- > >> Datum: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:15:44 -0800 >> Von: Howard Lewis Ship >> An: Tapestry users >> Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation >> > > >> I've been coming to the same conclusion. >> >> I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several >> online articles. >> >> I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of >> Tapestry and be useful to boot. >> >> So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". >> It would replace the tutorial. >> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost >>> everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. >>> Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations >>> >> thus >> >>> making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get >>> >> going. >> >>> Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm >>> >> looking >> >>> for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no >>> guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics >>> using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a >>> beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you >>> >> started >> >>> with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic >>> >> to >> >>> look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on >>> >> a >> >>> subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous >>> examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly >>> >> there is >> >>> the component reference that not only contains documentation for a >>> >> specific >> >>> component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common >>> >> use >> >>> cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for >>> >> how to >> >>> have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain >>> component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. >>> This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static >>> Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is >>> >> not >> >>> mentioned in the docum
Re: [T5] improve documentation
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Howard Lewis Ship wrote: I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of Tapestry and be useful to boot. This is great news!!! As a struggling newbie this is exactly what I've been looking for. I will be eagerly awaiting it's development. Here are a few thoughts from this newbie's perspective, in case they might help. If you have an idea for an application that will demonstrate every bit of Tapestry, I'm sure it will cover everything I'm looking for. My apologies ahead of time if any of the following is stating the obvious. First, I'd personally prefer tutorials that don't assume I'm using an IDE. I've had trouble following some tutorials because of that. When I see IDE, I think of hard drives. My editor of choice is vim. If the tutorial builds the example application incrementally, please include the includes when code is added. I know they may be obvious to experienced users. With the current tutorial when it had me add a bit of code to an existing class, it sometimes took me quite a while, and a bit of Googling, to find the includes I needed to add to make the code work. As I said, I'm sure the example app will cover everything I'm looking for. At the moment I'm looking for examples of handling relational data. I will also be needing examples of handling security at some point. I've only looked briefly at some acegi examples. I know it handles role based security. Does it also handle "object owner" based security? Using a photo gallery app as an example, I might want to give "admin" users the ability to add/edit photos to/in all photo albums, and give less powerful users the ability to only add/edit photos in albums they created. Kevin http://www.RawFedDogs.net http://www.WacoAgilityGroup.org Bruceville, TX Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes. Longum iter est per praecepta, breve et efficax per exempla!!! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I'd prefer if it were more like jumpstart than petstore. Any chance jumpstart becoming part of the framework? Andy superoverdr...@gmx.de schrieb: An good old pet-shop application...with lots of Ajax would be nice...or something similiar. It could coves common questions on the Tapestry mailing list from the past by providing an example implementation. Would be good if it also contained one or the other things of the following list: - Caching HTML fragments (e.g. expensive database queries) that only need to be generated every 5 minutes or 5 hours. - Dynamic rendering of form elements (when the configuration is read from a database, for dynamic form field definitions, e.g. in the backend "3 textfields with 50 chars max, 10 checkboxes with 3 minimum selections.) - some "common" Ajax/DHTML stuff you see nowadays on most websites..e.g. "animations", e.g. imagine you delete a row from a table that dissolves with a small animation, or combining an Ajax List with autocomplete or something like this here: http://www.interiders.com/2008/02/11/prototextboxlist-meets-autocompletion/ and stuff like progress bars (e.g. during a search) Just a few suggestions! Toby Original-Nachricht Datum: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:15:44 -0800 Von: Howard Lewis Ship An: Tapestry users Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation I've been coming to the same conclusion. I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several online articles. I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of Tapestry and be useful to boot. So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". It would replace the tutorial. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote: Hi all, Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly that use case. But it seems that the user wasn't able to find it - either he didn't look at all or more probably, he looked in the wrong place. How could he possibly know, that the solution to his use case is documented in a component named Delegate? Because I think that the current arrangement of the documentation makes it hard to grasp the concepts of Tapestry, especially for beginners, and to quickly find the information one seeks, I propose the following steps to be taken to improve the documentation: 1. Re-arrange the current documentation to not just be an alphabetically ordered list of topics but instead to be some kind of guide to Tapestry. Group topics that belong together, start with basic topics and end with advanced ones. 2. Print a short description of the purpose of a component next to its link in the component reference. 3. Integrate the various documents into a coherent documentation that follows a red line, beginning at the basics and ending with advanced topics like manipulation of internal services. The tutorial could be used as a starting point. 4. Extend the Tapestry Cookbook. Move solutions to common use cases from the wiki (if they meet
Re: [T5] improve documentation
An good old pet-shop application...with lots of Ajax would be nice...or something similiar. It could coves common questions on the Tapestry mailing list from the past by providing an example implementation. Would be good if it also contained one or the other things of the following list: - Caching HTML fragments (e.g. expensive database queries) that only need to be generated every 5 minutes or 5 hours. - Dynamic rendering of form elements (when the configuration is read from a database, for dynamic form field definitions, e.g. in the backend "3 textfields with 50 chars max, 10 checkboxes with 3 minimum selections.) - some "common" Ajax/DHTML stuff you see nowadays on most websites..e.g. "animations", e.g. imagine you delete a row from a table that dissolves with a small animation, or combining an Ajax List with autocomplete or something like this here: http://www.interiders.com/2008/02/11/prototextboxlist-meets-autocompletion/ and stuff like progress bars (e.g. during a search) Just a few suggestions! Toby Original-Nachricht > Datum: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:15:44 -0800 > Von: Howard Lewis Ship > An: Tapestry users > Betreff: Re: [T5] improve documentation > I've been coming to the same conclusion. > > I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several > online articles. > > I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of > Tapestry and be useful to boot. > > So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". > It would replace the tutorial. > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > > everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > > Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations > thus > > making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get > going. > > Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm > looking > > for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no > > guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics > > using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > > beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you > started > > with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic > to > > look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on > a > > subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous > > examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly > there is > > the component reference that not only contains documentation for a > specific > > component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common > use > > cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for > how to > > have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain > > component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. > > This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static > > Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is > not > > mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the > > solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate > > component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly > that > > use case. But it seems that the user wasn't able to find it - either he > > didn't look at all or more probably, he looked in the wrong place. How > could > > he possibly know, that the solution to his use case is documented in a > > component named Delegate? > > Because I think that the current arrangement of the documentation makes > it > > hard to grasp the concepts of Tapestry, especially for beginners, and to > > quickly find the information one seeks, I propose the following steps to > be > > taken to improve the documentation: > > > > 1. Re-arrange the current documentation to not just be an alphabetically > > ordered list of topics but instead to be some kind of guide to Tapestry. > > Group topics that belong together, start with basic topics and end with > > advanced ones. > > 2. Print a short description of the purpose of a component next to its > link > > in the component reference. > > 3. Integrate the various documents into a coherent documentation that > > follows a red line, beginning at the basics and ending with advanced > topics > > like manipu
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I'd be happy to help and contribute. Uli Howard Lewis Ship schrieb: I've been coming to the same conclusion. I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several online articles. I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of Tapestry and be useful to boot. So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". It would replace the tutorial. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote: Hi all, Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly that use case. But it seems that the user wasn't able to find it - either he didn't look at all or more probably, he looked in the wrong place. How could he possibly know, that the solution to his use case is documented in a component named Delegate? Because I think that the current arrangement of the documentation makes it hard to grasp the concepts of Tapestry, especially for beginners, and to quickly find the information one seeks, I propose the following steps to be taken to improve the documentation: 1. Re-arrange the current documentation to not just be an alphabetically ordered list of topics but instead to be some kind of guide to Tapestry. Group topics that belong together, start with basic topics and end with advanced ones. 2. Print a short description of the purpose of a component next to its link in the component reference. 3. Integrate the various documents into a coherent documentation that follows a red line, beginning at the basics and ending with advanced topics like manipulation of internal services. The tutorial could be used as a starting point. 4. Extend the Tapestry Cookbook. Move solutions to common use cases from the wiki (if they meet certain quality criteria) and the component reference there. Steps 1 and 2 are easy to realize, steps 3 and 4 need more work. What do you think? What are your experiences with Tapestrys documentation? Do you think the proposed steps would lead to an improvement? What other aspects of the documentation do you think need improvement and how could they be improved? Cheers, Uli - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [T5] improve documentation
I've been coming to the same conclusion. I'm clearing time with my boss to pursue this, along with several online articles. I have an idea for an application that can demonstrate every bit of Tapestry and be useful to boot. So the "guide" is the reference, what I have planned is the "tour". It would replace the tutorial. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote: > Hi all, > > Tapestry's current documentation is very complete, covering almost > everything a developer needs to know to be productive with Tapestry. > Unfortunately this documentation is clustered across several locations thus > making it hard to find information and very hard for beginners to get going. > Sometimes even I am annoyed because I don't find the information I'm looking > for at the expected place. There is the official user guide, which is no > guide in the actual sense of the word but merely a collection of topics > using Tapestry-specific vocabulary as the topics, making it hard for a > beginner to get started. Then there is the tutorial that gets you started > with Tapestry but doesn't go deep enough to know the name of the topic to > look for in the user guide when a problem arises or more information on a > subject is needed. Thirdly, there is the wiki that contains numerous > examples on how to solve common use cases with Tapestry. And lastly there is > the component reference that not only contains documentation for a specific > component but also contains examples on how to use them to solve common use > cases. Today for example, someone on the users mailing list asked for how to > have some kind of a "dynamic component". He wanted to display a certain > component based on the outcome of a function he wrote in his page class. > This question has come up before on the list and because of the "Static > Structure, Dynamic Behavior" paradigm - which is a key principle and is not > mentioned in the documentation but at the bottom of the start page - the > solution is to use the Delegate component with blocks. In the Delegate > component reference documentation there is an example covering exactly that > use case. But it seems that the user wasn't able to find it - either he > didn't look at all or more probably, he looked in the wrong place. How could > he possibly know, that the solution to his use case is documented in a > component named Delegate? > Because I think that the current arrangement of the documentation makes it > hard to grasp the concepts of Tapestry, especially for beginners, and to > quickly find the information one seeks, I propose the following steps to be > taken to improve the documentation: > > 1. Re-arrange the current documentation to not just be an alphabetically > ordered list of topics but instead to be some kind of guide to Tapestry. > Group topics that belong together, start with basic topics and end with > advanced ones. > 2. Print a short description of the purpose of a component next to its link > in the component reference. > 3. Integrate the various documents into a coherent documentation that > follows a red line, beginning at the basics and ending with advanced topics > like manipulation of internal services. The tutorial could be used as a > starting point. > 4. Extend the Tapestry Cookbook. Move solutions to common use cases from the > wiki (if they meet certain quality criteria) and the component reference > there. > > Steps 1 and 2 are easy to realize, steps 3 and 4 need more work. > > What do you think? What are your experiences with Tapestrys documentation? > Do you think the proposed steps would lead to an improvement? What other > aspects of the documentation do you think need improvement and how could > they be improved? > > Cheers, > > Uli > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
