Casper, for the case when you can not enforce your users to have javascript, it's more worthwhile to compare Wicket to Tapestry5.
I'm evaluating the latter right now. On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Casper Bang <cas...@jbr.dk> wrote: > I was just wondering about the Wicket community's opinion of GWT. It seems > to share many of the positive characteristics as Wicket (focus on code, not > markup) with the major difference/benefit as I see, that is does not > maintain any state on the server. Also, with GWT you seem to get more > readily available components (i.e. http://extjs.com/explorer/). The bennefit > of Wicket as I can see, is that applications potentially degrade nicer and > the programming model hides the Ajax RPC better. Any thoughts? > > /Casper > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
