On 4/3/06, Dennis Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
/me just burned my fingers on the keyboard :-)
True, but it cheats a bit ... it relies on the fact that POJOs know how to serialize themselves already. We might be able to mine things like Commons Betwixt (POJO-->XML) for useful ideas. And, of course, the underlying functionality should be available via a Java API as well, to facilitate its use in AJAX event handlers.
>Since you never answered the question in your subject line :-), I am
>presuming that POJSO means Plain Old _javascript_ Object, right?
Oops, yes. BTW, "POJSO _javascript_" has no results in google, so this is hot stuff ;)
/me just burned my fingers on the keyboard :-)
>Given that, JSON has primitives for the Java->JS conversions (things like
>JSONStringer and JSONWriter) in addition to the primitives for JS->Java. Is
>what you are after some sort of wrapper around this (that avoids all the low
>level mechanics to assemble the JSON stream)? That would seem like a pretty
>nice gadget to have in your toolbox when you have a nice set of POJOs
>modelling the data on the server side already.
Hmmm ... it looks like their license is compatible as well.
http://www.json.org/license.html
>Encapsulating something like this in JSF components would be duck soup ...
>maybe <t:saveJSON> instead of <t:saveState> :-)
Interesting you mention this, as UISaveState is about 20 lines of java.
True, but it cheats a bit ... it relies on the fact that POJOs know how to serialize themselves already. We might be able to mine things like Commons Betwixt (POJO-->XML) for useful ideas. And, of course, the underlying functionality should be available via a Java API as well, to facilitate its use in AJAX event handlers.
>Dennis Byrne
>>
>> Craig
Dennis Byrne
Craig
