On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:51:22 -0300, Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us>
wrote:
I look at it a different way.
Tapestry is Tapestry. Most people who would buy the book won't be
tapestry experts, and won't know which book to buy, which will add to
the confusion.
One would have the word Advanced on it, the other wouldn't, so I see no
much confusion.
Most technical books go from simple to more advanced, and don't make you
buy an 'advanced' book. IoC, etc. chapters can be in the "Advanced"
section.
That's a good point. On the other had, Igor's book is almost 500 pages
long already.
Also, there is a huge downside to fragmentation. In my opinion, Java
(et all) for all its greatness,
and due to it's community involvement (which is a good thing) has one
weak point- there are
sometimes 1000s different ways to do the same thing, and can lead to
choice anxiety
http://jamesshelley.net/2011/08/choice-anxiety/ which can be paralyzing
and wastes time.
I really don't know what's your point here because I see no fragmentation
at all. Igor's book is for people who don't know Tapestry well yet. Mine
would be for people who already know Tapestry well, but want to go deeper.
If you want to limit your book for the experts, there are too few of
those to be worthwhile,so, your book should be aimed at people who know
nothing about tapestry-ioc, and the logical choice is to combine yours
and Igor's efforts.
No, my book would be for people who want to be experts.
I know it's cool (and easier) to try to publish your own book, but in
this context, I don't think its a good idea to have more than one.
If they were covering the same stuff, I could agree with you. And some
people does use number of books as a way of comparing options.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
