on 9/24/2000 6:16 PM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I am pretty sure (I haven't done it though) that the functionality
> of each WM directive can be easily implemented in Java within a JSP
> page, as WM functionality is covered by JSP's functionality.
True, but the methodology for implementing them is different. In JSP, you
would either use a taglib or implement it in Java itself. What isn't
possible to do in JSP is something simple like this:
#if ($foo)
<html> code </html>
#else
<html> other code </html>
#end
In JSP, you would need to do some seriously ugly hacking with <% %> to get
that to happen. Thing is that the above is something that I would get used
on about 90% of the pages I write, so it is important to me to have that
ability.
> I had said nothing about the reverse, converting JSP to WM, which is the
> problem you correctly identified, as WM doesn't cover JSP's
> functionality. (Further, it shows me you aren't reading what I am
> writing, I think, or I am not writing what I am thinking.)
>
> I am so happy with WM, I counsel friends considering JSP to try WM
> first, rather than try the other way, because, as you point out JSP
> isn't covered by WM, and JSP is a disgusting abomination, in my
> opinion. (I think the tag libraries make it worse than ASP, which I
> didn't think possible.) But we are getting a bit off topic here.
>
> Remember the context that came from : I chose to use WM in a project for
> a client because I felt that I was minimizing technology risk as I
> thought I would be able to move a WM implementation to JSP w/o major
> headache if problems arose.
Hmmm...I guess that is the disconnect between OSS and commercial software.
In OSS, if problems arise, you simply fix them. :-) No need to guard against
the need to switch. :-)
> Aside from the observation that when you use for the ends of the scale
> the things that you are comparing, those things will be far apart, care
> to elaborate a bit here?
MVC. :-)
> If you are saying that it tries to be 'far away' in that rather than
> unfettered access to data, control and resources available to the
> designer of a JSP page, WM contrains the programmatic functionality
> available to the designer to a small, limited set of actions, and that
> access to any resources and application 'flow' control is entirely in
> the domain of the programmer, then I agree.
right. I agree.
> On the other hand, if you say that they are both examples of a java
> servlet based web application development system that allows dynamic
> creation of web content, then WM is a lot closer than JSP than what I
> understand Broadvision to be.
> On the otherhand, Broadvision may be MVC nervana. (Haven't used it...)
I don't know anything about BV, nor really care. :-) Commercial software.
> It would be interesting to sit down sometime and chat about what you
> think I am saying, and what I think I am saying. It's pretty apparent
> that as of this moment, they aren't the same thing.
Yep, seems like we lost that "personal" connection in email. :-( Sorry about
that. :-( You live in bay area?
p.s. I'm working on my Turbine MVC/Model 2+1 talk right now for ApacheCon
EU. If you are going to be there, come to my talk. :-)
-jon
--
http://scarab.tigris.org/ | http://noodle.tigris.org/
http://java.apache.org/ | http://java.apache.org/turbine/
http://www.working-dogs.com/ | http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
http://www.collab.net/ | http://www.sourcexchange.com/
