Jamie, I visit Tacos's site quite often. But frankly, it doesn't seem too attractive comparing to the frameworks I metioned. It provides just a few Ajax enabled compoents and they are in fact "re-inventing the wheel", except that they are really Tapestry compoents.
On 8/12/05, Jamie Orchard-Hays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alex, there's work being done on this at the Tacos project. You might > want to join the discussion on the tacos developer list. > > Jamie > > > On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Alex Ieong wrote: > > > Remeber that months ago I posted a mail here and tried to draw some > > attention but at last it seemed no futher discussion. Recently I am > > looking into Ajax framework and I've got some thoughts which I'd like > > to share with you. > > > > Ajax is getting popular and a lot of Ajax frameworks are growing, for > > example: prototype (ruby on rails), Rico, scriptaculo, DWR, Ajax.NET, > > Atlas.... and a lot more out there! Their communities are already > > formed! > > > > Most of them have something in common: most of them evolve from and > > full-feature javascript frameworks, by experts of javascript - the > > "JA" in Ajax. And the ready made Ajax "components" in their frameworks > > are just working and LOOKING great! But the function of those > > compoents are quite "optional" to a web application. For example, > > auto-complete, instant search....etc. Our application can live without > > them - just feeling not that great. Oh yes, they are server-friendly > > and work fine with all kind of backend technology. > > > > Let me categorize them as "Eye-Candy Ajax Frameworks" Rico and > > scriptaculo are in this category. > > > > Another category I'd like to name them "RPC Ajax Frameworks". DWR and > > Ajax.NET are in this category. These frameworks involve some backend > > stuff. Note that they are still using the "X" in Ajax (XML / > > XMLHttpRequest), but if you use them, they can help you expose some > > backend logic and invoke them easily in Javascript. DWR can help you > > to expose some Java logics as a Javascript "stub" via its servlet. > > Ajax.NET can automagically make a .NET web method "Ajax-ready" by > > adding a special attribute. Sounds familiar? Just like RMI in Java or > > Web Service? Yes, that's why I name it. They are just easy to use and > > flexible! > > > > So let's back to our topic: Ajax + Tapestry / or other Web applcation > > framework. Both eye-candy ones and RPC ones are quite frendly to > > webapp framework. Is it really necessary for an existing web > > application framework to conquer further? Or just make friend with > > these neutral buddies? IMO, I would like to take the peaceful > > approach: > > > > 1. We can choose many friendly Ajax framework freely, no lock-in. We > > can use many many eye-candy ones with our favorite webapp framework - > > if it can show some friendship to its partners. BTW, will Altas rule > > the Ajax world after its release? :-) > > > > 2. For RPC ones, I don't think there are any conflicts. Anybody here > > ever hope your beloved webapp framework to have Web Services extention > > instead of using Axis / JWSDP? > > > > My conclusion: embrace those frameworks and provide some official > > instructions to integrate with them (and say DWR friendly... etc). We > > are not going to re-invent the wheel, aren't we? > > > > Let's discuss. :-) > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Best Regards, Alex Ieong / xela.org / MO --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
