struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Martin Cooper" <mart...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecate or remove Dojo plugin
Date Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:54:25 GMT
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Bob Tiernay <btiernay@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Has anyone really looked into a comparison between using a taglib vs. a raw
> javascript framework across these dimensions:


Hey, don't look at me - I gave up using server-side rendering years ago! ;-)

--
Martin Cooper



> 1. Performance (page load time / bandwidth) (think s:head across most
> pages)
> 2. Expressiveness
> 3. Unobtrusiveness
> 4. Maintainability
> 5. Understandability
> 6. Modularity
>
> My experience has been that all of these are enhanced when using the later.
> I really don't see why even a taglib is even on the table.  Perhaps I'm
> missing something here, but what is to be gained by unifying javascript
> libraries with a taglib fa├žade? This smells of commons logging.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Martin Cooper" <martinc@apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 7:36 PM
> To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
> Cc: <newton.dave@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecate or remove Dojo plugin
>
>
>  On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Ted Husted <husted@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>  Dojo seems to get the most lip service, but I've seen persistence
>>> reports that YUI has broader acceptance.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The thing is, it depends a whole lot on what you are doing with it.
>>
>> For example, the people I know who are developing rich client-side apps
>> with
>> JavaScript are using Ext JS or Dojo. None of them are using YUI because
>> YUI
>> simply isn't appropriate, or complete enough, for that kind of usage. It's
>> perfectly fine, though, if what you want is to add some AJAXy capabilities
>> to a more traditional web app.
>>
>> As another example, there are certainly plenty of people building point
>> applications with Prototype and its friends, but if you're building
>> something that needs to be extensible and include components from
>> elsewhere,
>> you almost certainly don't want to be using a framework that messes with
>> core JavaScript types.
>>
>> --
>> Martin Cooper
>>
>>
>>
>>> -Ted.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 4:48 PM, Dave Newton <newton.dave@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > --- On Tue, 7/22/08, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >> Isn't Dojo the defacto ajax standard on the web?
>>> >
>>> > In terms of deployments I'd put money on Prototype and/or jQuery. Not
>>> that it's a large sample size, but I don't know *anybody* using Dojo
>>> outside
>>> of S2.
>>> >
>>> > Dave
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> HTH, Ted
>>> http://husted.com/ted/blog/
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message