Em Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:39:56 -0300, ice <fra...@gmail.com> escreveu:
Even more of a reason to encapsulate as much as possible all this
patches. Otherwise, as time passes, the API would end up polluted with
javascript
patches to support required behaviour.
Does anyone volunteer to write this Javascript encapsulation layer? I
think it's a nice idea, but I don't have the time nor the Javascript
knowledge needed.
In my view, javascript/css is a very dangerous arena, and deep
integration can lead you to lock-ins such as this one.
My concept of lock-in is not being able to use an alternative (ActiveX,
for example), so there's no lock-in here, as you can use any Javascript
framework alongside Prototype.
Where do you see CSS deep integration? CSS provides easy overriding of
everything and, in addition, Tapestry provides a configuration symbol to
prevent its CSS file to be included.
IMHO, tapestry-core should be as javascript free as possible, and another
module should start to model, in the best possible way, how to deal with
the UI.
Tapestry-core is not dependent in Prototype nor Javascript itself, some
components are.
--
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
