The advantage to using a thin-client, distributed architecture is that it will tremendously simplify real-time collaboration, which is the functionality that I would ultimately like to bring to the project. Making it a thin client might entail a hit to performance, but we've made some prototypes, and I believe that we can still produce a snappy, functional UI under this architecture. Thanks for the input.
Jake On 8/23/07, noni_4444 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We plan to use batik for something similar but we want to use a fat > client. > Why do you want to use a thin client, when user would be interacting with > your thin client at fast speed. I mean won't using a thin client with Ajax > effect the performance/responsiveness of your client. > > Naveed > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/using-Batik-with-JSON-tf4291082.html#a12288848 > Sent from the Batik - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
