1. Design concern (Wicket vs. ZK)
Both frameworks are thin-client and generate AJAX, the biggest difference is
Wicket uses Java and HTML while ZK uses XUL or other scripting language.
What's the advantage and disadvantage in both cases?
Advantage of HTML is that you can work with web designers & standard
tools for laying out and that you have very direct control of what
will be in your users' browsers. XUL might be nice if the framework
can decide to send it directly to the client if that supports it.
I think XUL as a semantic UI language is great. If only more browsers
would support it, we could drop HTML altogether :)
I suppose one could write XUL components with wicket and have a servlet
filter translate it to XHTML. The challenge would be wiring the events
from the generated HTML to the wicket framework. It's an interesting
idea though (I think).
--
Matthijs Wensveen
Func. Internet Integration
W http://www.func.nl
T +31 20 4230000
F +31 20 4223500
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
