tomcat-taglibs-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark R. Diggory" <>
Subject Re: Tag List
Date Tue, 18 Feb 2003 23:25:57 GMT
Just to be clear, I was responding to a user with an interest in 
convering the demo example in the Webservices tutorial into JSLT. A very 
specific and small application. We're on the Taglibs listserv. I saw 
several people tell him to use heavier frameworks external to this 
project. I just wanted to provide him with answer he asked for and could 
"easily do" in one JSP page with JSTL.


That said, I agree with you on many points. I have no problem with MVC 
itself, I'll look over maverick more to see if I feel the same way about 
it that I do about Struts.

I primarily struggle with the whole issue of having "too much 
configuration" mapping going on.

1.) I have this great Tomcat JSP Servlet Container that works quite 
elegantly. Like an http server, you know what url's are going to lead to 
your JSP's simply by thier location on the filesystem.  Quite nice, easy 
to use. You've got the Context,Session,Request,Response objects to store 
things in when you need to. Its easy to get used to. And you got custom 
tags to push your model back behind the presentation.

2.) Then you have frameworks like struts that introduce another "level" 
of configuration into the picture. You end up with web.xml and struts 
config.xml files in your web application. You end up tracing through 
them trying to setup all this stuff. What if you want to use Cocoon too, 
now you've got a whole other config to deal with on top of your current 
config. ouch... A whole other realm of complexity.

This is all too much for a small application.

Schnitzer, Jeff wrote:
> Aside from that, the main problem with pages that submit back to
> themselves is that they confuse the hell out of designers.  My designers
> would be bewildered by all that business logic, whether it be in tags or
> scriptlets.

Granted that is a "pro" for the use of a framework that breaks the 
presentation off of the model. I would never suggest that is not a 
benifit when you have designers to contend with. Or larger applications 
to work with.

> which point what you have is a lightweight MVC framework.  In
> fact, this is pretty much exactly what Maverick does.  It's what Struts
> does too, except that Struts does it with 100 times more code...
Yes, and mine does it simply by using a JSP as Controller instead of a 
bunch of servlets and a config file. A simple solution for his request.

> Any webapp of a more than trivial nature ends up with a significant
> amount of "framework"; it's just a question of whether you use existing
> software or craft your own.  That said, I believe frameworks should be
> minimalist, modular, and focused on a narrow goal - which is why my
> fellow developers and I gave up on Struts, WebWork, etc and wrote
> Maverick.

Cheers :-)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message