incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Coach Wei" <co...@nexaweb.com>
Subject RE: [Proposal] RCF - a rich component library for JSF
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2007 22:02:35 GMT
Hello Matthias, thanks for the reply. 

> 
> I am not really familiar w/ XAP. XAP can be used to enable
> JSP/Servlet/Struts/Shale/JSF pages by putting some ajax stuff and a
> "binding" for the components/tags?
> One idea that the community could work on is to add
XAP-Bridge/Support.
> 

XAP does Ajax component wrapping on the client side in contrast to what
jMaki does on the server side. XAP is a 100% client side framework that
enables developers to write apps using a declarative XML syntax instead
of coding JavaScript. Different from JSF (which does processing on the
server side), XAP runtime converts such XML into actual Ajax code on the
client side and maintains state on the client side. 

More info can be seen at http://incubator.apache.org/xap

For example, a sample XAP app
http://www.rockstarapps.com/samples/sendmeapic

Do you think XAP and RCF can work together?

> > 3. Speaking of JSF, jMaki is a fairly well known JSF open source
project
> > (though not Apache). jMaki is open. Instead of reinventing the wheel
of
> > building yet another set of Ajax components, it uses existing Ajax
> > toolkits such as Dojo, etc. Does RCF use its own Ajax toolkit or
uses
> > some third party Ajax toolkit?
> >
> 
> RCF has its own Ajax toolkit. That is because RCF is a *rich* JSF
> component library. RCF has JSF concepts "ported" to the client. Dojo
is
> somewhat generic and can be used to create a "simple" ajax-jsf-comp.
If
> you want to create a full ajax-style JSF-based framework, you'll come
> to the point that this is needed; at least reasonable. (RCF is
> containing components and framework feature). jMaki is a wrapper
> project to simply create JSF components, based  on libs like dojo.
> Compared to jmaki, RCF has also "full qualified" jsf components,
instead
> of a
> "ajax-wrapped renderer". I wouldn't call it "reinventing the wheels".
> 

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "*rich*" JSF component vs.
"*simple*" ajax-jsf-comp? I don't get the differences between jMaki and
RCF (besides using different tag names and Ajax components). I think
they all work similar by converting JSP Tag or JSF tags into Ajax code
on the server send the Ajax code to run on the client side, and maintain
a stateful component model on the server, right? jMaki can wrap a "rich"
Ajax component not any less than RCF, right? What do you mean by "JSF
concepts ported to the client"? Is there any architectural differences
between RCF and jMaki? 

Thanks...


--Coach


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message