On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:21:57 +0200, Onno Scheffers <o...@piraya.nl> wrote:
>> >> The problem is: how would Tapestry do that? Not using any framework? >> This would mean the committers would need to spend an awful lot of >> time rewriting something that Javascript frameworks already do. Not >> only this, but also to cope with the insonsistencies between browsers. >> Defining an API that could be implemented in Prototype, jQuery or >> another framework? More viable, but still a lot of work. > > > So far, the most complex parts I've seen that need replacing are the > onDOMLoaded stuff, the selectors and the AJAX stuff. Everything besides the > selectors have been done long before the web-frameworks first implemented > them. > The selectors (and DOM-traversal) would be the most work to rewrite in plain > Javascript, unless Tapestry only uses element ids for lookups, I haven't > checked this yet. Maybe it doesn't have to be plain js since there's a lot to be gained from these libraries. Perhaps all Tapestry's .js files could be moved to a tapestry-prototype module, each of those files could then be reimplemented in a tapestry-jquery module. A problem remains with script snippets written directly from renderSupport.addScript() It sounds pretty cumbersome to maintain multiple modules though. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
