Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) wrote the following on 4/19/2005 5:30 AM:
I also think that a well-designed web-UI does not need JS at all...
Sorry to jump on the train late, but the above is completely BS. If you
want to use standard HTML, then there will be some things you will HAVE
to do with
I liked the smartclient technology very much! It's great!
Just wondering if there will be a similar possibility in
Java Server Faces?
Can I combine the capabilities of JSF and AJAX ?
RR Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) wrote the following on 4/19/2005 5:30 AM:
I also think that a well-designed
On 5/2/05, Sergey Livanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I liked the smartclient technology very much! It's great!
Just wondering if there will be a similar possibility in
Java Server Faces?
Can I combine the capabilities of JSF and AJAX ?
Yes.
The general idea is that you encapsulate the
. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 4:31 PM
To: David Suarez
Cc: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
David Suarez wrote:
Saw the flood of these AJAX messages and was interested so I did a
quick
test using a plain html page to see how easy
Craig McClanahan wrote:
The 3000 or so people that are here want to be able to ask questions
about using Struts
IMO, using Struts with client side technologies such as .js, dojo and
ajax is on topic.
.V
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
is dead and needn't be flogged any
more.
Dennis
Vic Cekvenich (netsql) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: news [EMAIL PROTECTED]
04/21/2005 08:58 AM
Please respond to
Struts Users Mailing List user@struts.apache.org
To
user@struts.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
Craig McClanahan wrote
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think
all salient points have been made.
Agree.
It's almost friday:
http://www.moronland.com/image.php?media=Apple%20Weed
.V
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Heh. Normally I hate stuff like this, but for some reason, that one was
so silly it just cracked me up. Must be because I just woke up. :)
Erik
Vic Cekvenich (netsql) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think
all salient points have been made.
Agree.
It's almost friday:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
On Tue, April 19, 2005 10:47 am, Erik Weber said:
I, with respect for the author, disagree with this entirely.
I am people, and this is not what I expect or desire at all. As a user,
I expect and desire 1) A fast download 2) my bookmarks to work/easy to
remember URLs
Erik Weber wrote:
SwingWorker worker = new CustomSwingWorker(GET_XML_RPC_DATA) {
I guess I'm in the wrong forum.
:)
Erik
Ahh it's the right forum ;-).
My code is VERY similar to above.
.V
-
To unsubscribe,
There are lots of issues besides just wanting this to happen. All
serious attempts so far have pretty much failed. Have you looked at
Flash, if this is your big interest? Flash ActionScript pretty much
does what you want. But, I don't think it is a good idea. I think
you have to keep some
You know, if what you want is Swing on the client, i.e., you write code to
do everything, then my VisML project that I mentioned yesterday is one
such option.
But you start to see in a pretty big hurry that it isn't a good idea...
One of the most powerful aspects of web development is the way
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
someone mentioned the idea of having custom tags
that generate the underlying code... this is an intersting idea to me
because you get the whole Swing-ish code-centric approach underlying it
all, but with custom tags so you don't have to do all the code if you
don't want
Good idea. There is an incipient similar thing going on with the
image package in the commons sandbox. Abey Mullasery's work there is
interesting. I think it needs a bit more practical grounding, but
that will come. These two projects do not overlap, but the point
does.
On 4/20/05, Frank W.
Dakota Jack wrote:
According to the linguists, the beauty of language is just the
opposite, viz. its public nature, so that private meanings are not
only allowed, they categorically make no sense.
That's swell, from an academic point of view, but the fact is that
people mean different things with
the
trick there.
I was interested in the conversation, hope this adds some value.
Regards...djsuarez
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:49 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
Martin Cooper
that uses Dojo if
you want!
Frank
I was interested in the conversation, hope this adds some value.
Regards...djsuarez
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:49 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie
The fact that words have multiple meanings/uses does not mean the
meanings are private. If the meanings are private, they have
absolutely no use whatsoever. That is a DOH!
SNIP
On 4/20/05, Dave Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's swell, from an academic point of view, but the fact is that
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:I do think there is more
that can be done, and I still think the tags are the best way to present
it.
Maybe tags that leverage dojo.js?
Hey, if you'd like to be involved with my efforts, I could certainly use
the help in ...
Do you sf.net or wiki type resources?
.V
Vic Cekvenich (netsql) wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:I do think there is more
that can be done, and I still think the tags are the best way to
present it.
Maybe tags that leverage dojo.js?
Today I did some refactoring of the whole thing, and the important point
of it all is that a developer
On 4/20/05, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll be doing sf.net... Once I have a complete codebase (not final, just
more complete than what I posted previously) I'll see about getting it
set up as a project on struts.sf.net. I think that's the right place
for it.
In the mean
I apologize... I was not paying attention and didn't realize this was on
the users list. There has simultaneously been a thread about this on
the user list and the dev list (we were told it was appropriate for the
dev list by the way), and I didn't notice. My bad.
Frank
Craig McClanahan
I noticed that the last few days there were four and five posts to
this list, so the damage should be minimal. I am not going to state
the obvious I noticed the following Shale thread here as well.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=struts-userm=111272767800458w=2
Let's keep a clean ship,
Hey - please write to the Mailing List and no CC please.
Thx Axel
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I apologize... I was not paying attention and didn't realize this was
on the users list. There has simultaneously been a thread about this
on the user list and the dev list (we were told it was
On 4/18/05, Martin Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To get beyond doing the grunt work yourself for Ajax, I recommend taking a
look at this:
http://dojotoolkit.org/intro_to_dojo_io.html
and downloading the dojo.io package from their site.
Personally, I'm not convinced that we need
-Original Message-
Users that turn off JS are akin, in my mind, to automobile drivers who
decide they would rather play Fred Flintstone, cut holes in the
floorboards and not bother starting the engine. Oh, you'll get around,
but your missing out!
While I am certainly not trying to say
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
On Mon, April 18, 2005 11:12 am, Emmanouil Batsis said:
I haven't really studied the samples yet, but it would seem more
semantically correct to me if the html:form was used to make this work.
I'll try to come up with more concrete suggestions.
I thought of that
Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) a écrit :
Well,... If we look behind the problems that could arise with JavaScript...
I am really convinced that JS in a webapp is a really BAD idea.
Think about Cross-Scripting.
It is not that your web-applicaiton is the culprit, but someoneelse's
bad-behaving Javascript
Based on my experience porting the Struts tags to AJAX/SWF
(swf.dev.java.net), I would agree with Craig that the existing Struts
tags would be sufficient; however, tweaking the event handler attrs,
as in SWF, does provide some simplification. For example (in SWF), w/
o the tweak we would
On Tue, April 19, 2005 2:47 am, Craig McClanahan said:
This is exactly the area I've been having trouble with this proposal
as well ... tell me again why you can't use Ajax techniques with the
standard Struts HTML tags?
No one, at least not me, has made that statement at any point. I frankly
On Tue, April 19, 2005 12:53 am, Martin Cooper said:
To get beyond doing the grunt work yourself for Ajax, I recommend taking a
look at this:
http://dojotoolkit.org/intro_to_dojo_io.html
and downloading the dojo.io package from their site.
It does look cool. However, in some ways what I
On Tue, April 19, 2005 5:30 am, Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) said:
I also think that a well-designed web-UI does not need JS at all...
Then what results is exactly what you say: a WEB UI. This was good enough
five years ago, it isn't today.
People expect, generally, more robust UIs delivered in a
-Original Message-
I also think that a well-designed web-UI does not need JS at all...
Then what results is exactly what you say: a WEB UI. This was good enough
five years ago, it isn't today.
People expect, generally, more robust UIs delivered in a browser. They
expect webapps that
On Tue, April 19, 2005 10:37 am, Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) said:
Maybe I'm to old (in respect to IT-technology), but for me most of those
highly sophisticated apps (be them client or web) are not very usable...
I prefer a simple processing scheme.
No doubt there were (are still are) some very
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
On Tue, April 19, 2005 5:30 am, Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) said:
I also think that a well-designed web-UI does not need JS at all...
Then what results is exactly what you say: a WEB UI. This was good enough
five years ago, it isn't today.
People expect, generally,
On Tue, April 19, 2005 10:46 am, Michael J. said:
Struts-only or JSP-only solution is not good enough. The more portable
is the better, so when I read Frank's proposal I thought, why those
input controls are generated with custom tags? What if controls were
created with Javascript? Custom tags
On Tue, April 19, 2005 10:47 am, Erik Weber said:
I, with respect for the author, disagree with this entirely.
I am people, and this is not what I expect or desire at all. As a user,
I expect and desire 1) A fast download 2) my bookmarks to work/easy to
remember URLs 3) an organized and
Hear-hear. My users would brain me if I just provided that amount of
interface on a web application.
-Original Message-
From: Frank W. Zammetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 April 2005 16:17
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa
, April 19, 2005 10:48 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
On Tue, April 19, 2005 5:30 am, Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21) said:
I also think that a well-designed web-UI does not need JS at all...
Then what results is exactly what you say
Sometimes it takes more developer effort/technology to create something
that's easier to use. Sometimes it doesn't. But to say that
client-side scripting is completely unnecessary for well designed
application UIs is incorrect, IMO. It depends on what your users need
to do.
People just
We need to agree to disagree on the virtue/detriment of javascript in
web pages. Different applications for different audiences with
different purposes have different solutions.
At my company we've implemented intranet apps where the users do a
significant amount of heads-down data entry.
+1 Frank! Good old agility and Xtreme principles say do it and worry
about all this wah wah wah wah later. You have a simple and very
useful idea which is at the beginning stages but which is well-thought
out and which is based on a solid engineering foundation. Go for it
as you initially
I don't think he said absolutely everyone, including specifically
Erik Weber, Erik. You turn out, in the end, to be just a person: not
people. ///;-)
Jack
On 4/19/05, Erik Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
On Tue, April 19, 2005 5:30 am, Jesse Alexander (KBSA 21)
Michael J. wrote:
People just should stop thinking in terms of client-side scripting
and start thinking
in terms of client-side rendering :-)
(XAML, XUL, Flex, JDNC, DHTML(Ajax, JavaScript)).
UI naturaly should be done on client side, asking for domain and other
services from the
HUZZAH! +1 This is about AJAX, not about JavaScript. I am with those
who say that if you don't like abortion, don't have one. Also, if you
don't like JavaScript, don't use it. But, in the middle of an AJAX
discussion all this pro and con JavaScript discussion is ridiculous.
Jack
On 4/19/05,
That's an interesting comment Vic... are you saying you favor an approach
where the entire client view itself is rendered on the client?
I ask because that used to be my thinking, and I'm moved away from it to
some degree. By way of example:
* The little proof of concept thing I mentioned
Dakota Jack wrote:
I don't think he said absolutely everyone, including specifically
Erik Weber, Erik. You turn out, in the end, to be just a person: not
people. ///;-)
Not me, though; I'm actually people.
I may be schizophrenic, but at least I have each other.
on-topic obligatory='true'
I
On 4/19/05, Dave Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on-topic obligatory='true'
I like fast download times, but I hate the web: I want any page that's
more complicated than Here, download this, you'll be better off to
have functionality that doesn't make me wait all the time. For a server
You would, I think, love some of the apps I've put together. The problem
though, as far as other developers go, is that they really are a whole
different paradigm than what most are used to.
Ironically, the very first web app I did for my current employer some five
years ago is the best example
Michael J. wrote:
offtopic
Have you tried this one: http://map.search.ch/ Try to magnify ;)
/offtopic
Oh, that's neat. If you could drag it it'd be like a real application!
Cool!
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Simply put, there isn't the usual HTML rendering happening on the server because the
HTML essentially already exists.
Just a nitpick; there's never any HTML rendering on the server.
Generation, perhaps, but not rendering.
/bitchiness
Dave
This may be straying a bit from the AJAX discussion?
On 4/19/05, Michael J. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/19/05, Dave Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on-topic obligatory='true'
I like fast download times, but I hate the web: I want any page that's
more complicated than Here, download
Well, to the extent that AJAX techniques can make a site seem faster, it
is actually on-topic.
And I don't care if this map thing is on-topic or not, it is cool as hell :)
By the way, not sure who said it, but you can in fact scroll around this
map, just like Google Maps, by dragging. The zoom
That's actually a good point... We've all heard about JSF and ASP.Net, how
they handle client-side events server-side, which is a concept I've never
been especially enamored with. But, when you see some actual examples of
this in things like what Google is doing, you start to reconsider that
I may be nuts, many have said I am on this list, unfairly, but isn't
rendering HTML capable of being understood either as rendering the
HTML meaning creating the HTML or rendering the HTML meaning
creating the view from the HTML? At least people like David Geary
talk about serverside rendering
Dakota Jack wrote:
This may be straying a bit from the AJAX discussion?
...which is straying a bit from Struts?
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think this AJAX discussion was about integrating AJAX and Struts.
Not complaining about your asides, Dave. Just trying to maintain some
focus. ///;-)
On 4/19/05, Dave Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dakota Jack wrote:
This may be straying a bit from the AJAX discussion?
...which is
Dakota Jack wrote:
I may be nuts, many have said I am on this list, unfairly, but isn't
rendering HTML capable of being understood either as rendering the
HTML meaning creating the HTML or rendering the HTML meaning
creating the view from the HTML? At least people like David Geary
talk about
Not if I complete my project! ;)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
On Tue, April 19, 2005 1:37 pm, Dave Newton said:
Dakota Jack wrote:
This may be straying a bit from the AJAX discussion?
...which is straying a bit from
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Not if I complete my project! ;)
I hope you do!
See if you can put some version on struts.sf.net, this is how some
committers got in.
I am no JavaScript guru, but something similar to XUL and new W3 XForms,
were it's even possible to just send XML-RPC style XML to the
On Tue, April 19, 2005 2:33 pm, Vic Cekvenich (netsql) said:
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Not if I complete my project! ;)
I hope you do!
See if you can put some version on struts.sf.net, this is how some
committers got in.
That's my plan at the moment. There frankly isn't a ton left to do
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
The problem arose, initially, because we were allowing for something like
300 records max at a time. Such a request was taking like 5 seconds on a
P3 550. As it turns out, the response from the server was sub-second
(VERY low, better than anything we see even today in
Perhaps I'm missing the simplicity of your proposal. Let's take the example
from your original RFC. Here it is, for convenience:
In the JSP page:
html:button property=button1 value=Click to do Ajax!
ajaxRef=button1/
In the Ajax config file:
AjaxConfig
ajaxElement
idbutton1/id
Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, April 19, 2005 2:47 am, Craig McClanahan said:
This is exactly the area I've been having trouble with this proposal
as well ... tell me again why you can't use Ajax techniques with the
standard Struts HTML
Martin Cooper wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing the simplicity of your proposal. Let's take the example
from your original RFC. Here it is, for convenience:
snip
Now let's look at the equivalent if I use the existing Struts HTML tags and
Dojo.
In the JSP page:
html: button property=button1 value=Click
Martin Cooper wrote:
* Provide a client side JavaScript library that does the grunt work
of making the back-end XmlHttpRequest call, and updating the
corresponding portion of your DOM. Martin likes DOJO for this;
there are also a bunch of other libraries that do the same sort
of thing that
Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martin Cooper wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing the simplicity of your proposal. Let's take the
example
from your original RFC. Here it is, for convenience:
snip
Now let's look at the equivalent if I use the existing
Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martin Cooper wrote:
* Provide a client side JavaScript library that does the grunt work
of making the back-end XmlHttpRequest call, and updating the
corresponding portion of your DOM. Martin likes DOJO for this;
What you demonstrate here I would also argue is worse for page authors,
who now have to be concerned with script writing as well as layout of
simple HTML tags. You can argue that a page author would know
Javascript as well, and you may be right in most cases, but the idea
that everyone seems
On 4/19/05, Shihgian Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you demonstrate here I would also argue is worse for page authors,
who now have to be concerned with script writing as well as layout of
simple HTML tags. You can argue that a page author would know
Javascript as well, and you may be
Michael J. wrote:
Glorified graphics artists do not do markup, they create nice mockups
in Photoshop, which adore big bosses, who tell those unglofied ones to
implement unearthy coolness in code. And those implementing this fancy
stuff better know [at least about existence of] Javascript, XHTML,
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: Shihgian Lee
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
I don't think saying it is wrong is accurate... It is just an
environment you are probably not used to. Some argue it is better that
way and many say that's the way we should be moving. Not sure I agree,
but some
Martin Cooper wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Again, by all means, use Dojo. Not everyone will agree it's a good
answer though. Not everyone will see it as the greatest thing since
sliced bread.
Poor fools. ;-) ;-) ;-)
--
Martin Cooper
Headline for tmrw bloogers:
You say it jokingly, but...
Vic Cekvenich (netsql) wrote:
Martin Cooper wrote:
Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
Again, by all means, use Dojo. Not everyone will agree it's a good
answer though. Not everyone will see it as the greatest thing since
sliced bread.
Poor fools.
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: Shihgian Lee
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
I don't think saying it is wrong is accurate... It is just an
environment you are probably not used to. Some argue it is better that
way and many say that's the way we should be moving. Not sure I agree,
but some
Martin Cooper wrote:
That's why I said or maybe somewhere else. It would be perfectly fine to
put the JavaScript functions in a separate .js file and linked to from the
page. And neither of us are talking scriptlets here. ;-)
Glad neither of us are talking scriplets :) Didn't think we were
Martin Cooper wrote:
My Huh? comment was in reference you your statement that the approach I
was describing doesn't really help people with existing apps, which I take
issue with. If you put the JavaScript methods in separate file, it has the
exact same impact on the JSP pages as your approach
+1 also to Frank's suggestions, although I realize he was not ready to
cash in the ticket yet. On the whole, I like his no nonsense and
non-convoluted approach to these problems. That is what I liked about
Struts from the beginning. The present course is not clear. Nor is
there any perceived
According to the linguists, the beauty of language is just the
opposite, viz. its public nature, so that private meanings are not
only allowed, they categorically make no sense. This has been the
rock-hard basis for modern linguistic analysis for as long as the Sun
has risen. Technical terms can
The problem with NET and JSF is not what they do client side but
what they do server side. They are just too heavy and will never
scale. This does not mean that they will not have a market.
Hopefully they will so that those who love them will have money and
leave us alone. But, for people who
Where do we find information about this marvellous stuff?
Rodolfo __
Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18/04/2005 15:02
Por favor, responda a Struts Users Mailing List
Para: Struts Users Mailing List user@struts.apache.org
cc: (cco: Rodolfo
Dakota Jack a écrit :
This is a fundamental shift in architecture that makes clear sense.
I tend to agree with you, and if this were to be integrated in Struts,
my life would be easier (I am using AJAX stuff in some parts of my
webapp). However, I have a serious concern related to security :
Rodolfo García Esteban/CYII a écrit :
Where do we find information about this marvellous stuff?
Rodolfo __
Look for XMLHttpRequest and/or ActiveXObject(Microsoft.XMLHTTP)
XML.com and the Apple dev center have good introductory articles about it.
Basically, this is a
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/AjaxStruts
On 4/18/05, Rodolfo García Esteban/CYII [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where do we find information about this marvellous stuff?
Rodolfo __
Dakota Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
18/04/2005 15:02
Por favor, responda a Struts Users
http://wiki.apache.org/struts/AjaxStruts
On 4/18/05, Stéphane Zuckerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rodolfo García Esteban/CYII a écrit :
Where do we find information about this marvellous stuff?
Rodolfo __
Look for XMLHttpRequest and/or
Good overview, Stephane
On 4/18/05, Stéphane Zuckerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rodolfo García Esteban/CYII a écrit :
Where do we find information about this marvellous stuff?
Rodolfo __
Look for XMLHttpRequest and/or ActiveXObject(Microsoft.XMLHTTP)
For articles, blogs, libraries, etc, related to this technology, take
a look at http://www.ajaxmatters.com/
Our own Frank wrote an article about using it on
http://www.omnytex.com/articles/xhrstruts/
He also proposed integrating the technology with the Struts taglibs:
Stéphane Zuckerman wrote:
if this were to be integrated in Struts,
my life would be easier.
I too will now check it out.
.V
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
eee... javascript...
yuck, ptooey! ptooey!!
--- Vic Cekvenich (netsql) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stéphane Zuckerman wrote:
if this were to be integrated in Struts,
my life would be easier.
I too will now check it out.
.V
On 4/6 I posted the following message to the Struts dev list... I can't
seem to find the thread in the list archives, if anyone else can I would
appreciate very much you posting the link to it...
This was discussing my proposal for integrating AJAX functionality into
the existing Struts taglibs.
ptooey...
I've always wanted to know how to spell that :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
On Mon, April 18, 2005 10:29 am, Woodchuck said:
eee... javascript...
yuck, ptooey! ptooey!!
--- Vic Cekvenich (netsql)
Frank,
You must've started typing this response a while ago. I already sent
a message on this thread linking to the dev email with your proposal.
Hubert
On 4/18/05, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/6 I posted the following message to the Struts dev list... I can't
seem to find
Yep, sorry about that... I had it in my drafts folder because I got called
away in the middle of it, and I didn't check all the replies to the
current thread before sending it so I didn't see your link until
afterwards. My bad :)
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex
JavaScript provides a client side rather developed engine in
JavaScript as well as Flash, etc. This is merely a resource. The
yuck, ptooey! ptooey response to these ideas, especially ones in
production and successful for quite a while, strikes me as rather less
than professional. I think it is
Let me first say that IMHO, introducing AJAX capabilities into the html
taglib is an awesome idea.
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
So, the question is, does anyone see this as something interesting?
Very. I was also thinking about working on AJAX taglibs using Sarissa
[1] (introductory article at
sorry, i couldn't resist .
actually, why don't we address this problem at the source rather than
using this javascript patch solution? (at least this is how i see it)
why don't the browser makers build internal mechanisms to allow posting
of forms without the need to refresh the html page? why
, 2005 11:12 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List; Dakota Jack
Subject: Re: AJAX: Whoa, Nellie!
Let me first say that IMHO, introducing AJAX capabilities into the html
taglib is an awesome idea.
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
So, the question is, does anyone see this as something interesting?
Very. I
Not sure what to say, Woodchuck, about your suggestion that a request
be sent that does not want a response and does not affect the HTML
page. What would happen next? And, how? This is perfectly
conceivable. Heck, I think that it might be possible as is. But, I
don't see this as even
No problemo. As far as the extension itself is concerned, I'd still
be interested in it, but like I mentioned earlier, only as a plugin
that doesn't change the base tags. The reasons are many and they are
mentioned in the dev thread you started. My main concern is
implementation lock-in.
SNIP
On 4/18/05, Dave Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or we could just use ActiveX controls.
*psych!*
/SNIP
Or JavaScript, or Applets, or Flash, or .. but,
most importantly, in this thread, AJAX with STRUTS.
Jack
--
You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
