cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Reinhard Poetz" <reinh...@apache.org>
Subject RE: CocoonForms compared with JSF
Date Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:56:58 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruno Dumon [mailto:bruno@outerthought.org] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 5:06 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: RE: CocoonForms compared with JSF
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2003-11-22 at 14:24, Danny Bols wrote:
> > > From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:reinhard@apache.org]
> > > Sent: zaterdag 22 november 2003 13:42
> > > To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> > > Subject: CocoonForms compared with JSF
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Over the last days I had an offlist discussion with Sylvain and I 
> > > don't want to keep back a very nice summary of Sylvain comparing 
> > > CocoonForms with JSF. I set up a Wiki page: 
> > > http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=CocoonFormsJSF
> > >
> > > We would be very interested in your opinions because this will 
> > > become a "FAQ" in the future (This week I hold a presentation on 
> > > Control Flow and only mentioned CocoonForms in a few 
> sentences but 
> > > in the break after it the "JSF-question" was one of the 
> first ones I 
> > > got ;-)
> > >
> > > And I'm with you Jörg, that we have to show that CocoonForms is 
> > > *NOT* tied to HTML at all. Maybe a XUL example and a second skin 
> > > would be great!
> > >
> > > Awaiting your comments :-)
> > 
> > Nice summary.
> > One thing worth mentioning IMO is the Inversion Of Control. Since 
> > woody is integrated in flow the script has control over the form 
> > processing steps. I don't know if JSF has solutions for this.
> 
> Indeed a good point to mention, though I think it's more 
> about separation of concerns. Most other webapp frameworks 
> like struts, JSF or tapestry cover both the flow and form 
> concerns, while woody only does forms.

added to the wiki page

> Another thing that makes woody different from JSF, at least I 
> think so, is that widgets in woody hold strongly typed data, 
> and that validation happens on this data, not on string 
> values. IIRC JSF only does conversion as part of the binding.

added to the wiki page

> Then there's also other stuff like the fact that the 
> structure of a form is described in a form definition (I have 
> no idea how JSF actually builds its component tree), and that 
> lightweight instances of this form definition are created 
> (i.e. what's common to all instances is only held once in 
> memory). Of course, this may make the structure of a Woody 
> form less flexible (but more formal), though with the 
> addition of Tim's union widget we can describe everything of 
> regular complexity (concatentation, repetition and alternation).

not added to the wiki page - if somebody is sure about this feel free to
add it to the wiki page

> 
> And last but not least, Woody fits better into Cocoon. IIRC, 
> JSF requires compliant implementations to support at least JSP ;-)

not added because JSF requrires JSP, CocoonForms requires Cocoon ;-)

--
Reinhard


Mime
View raw message