Hi Cagatay,
Can we try to find arguments in favour of possible javascript libraries?
Why do you prefer jQuery? The tomahawk dependency is on dojo 0.4,
current is 1.3.1, you just cannot compare them. jQuery plugins aren't
part of the main jQuery project, so maintenance may be not guaranteed on
the long term. For example the dojo dataGrid is still in dojox because
it has minor issues, but it still is superior to all "stable" jQuery
table plugins (e.g. flexgrid) I've seen. On the other hand the main
jQuery project lacks basic widgets (combo/select, input, table, ...).
Also dojo has a comprehesive validation concept over all its widgets
which isn't possible with the widespread jQuery plugins.
Best regards,
Ganesh
Cagatay Civici schrieb:
Tomahawk already has dojo a huge dependency.
For the new lib I'd favor using jquery UI plus stable jquery plugins
instead of dojo.
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
not sure I read that article, but I agree that it is worth to go the
Facelets road, for new things.
Not sure if EVERY 2.0 library needs to contain only template-based
components; old-fashion
renderers are still, ok...
so generally you also think it is worth to host something like that ?
I personally would like to start with this by introducing a
wrapper for
jQuery (included via JSF 2.0 resource handling)
-M
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Ganesh <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> Funny you're asking this today: Last night I've released the J4Fry
> dojoFacelets library on sourceforge. It's a pure JSF
template/dojo library,
> it was build on JSF 1.1/1.2 w/Facelets and it runs on JSF 2.0
out of the
> box. The templates are AJAX enabled via ui:define. The first
project based
> on the new components will be productive around juli in a
european bank.
> We've started working on this last autumn after I released this
artivle in
> german JavaMagazin, making the point that future JSF tag
libraries must be
> template based:
>
http://www.j4fry.org/resources/jung_JSF_JavaMagazin_Tag_Entwicklung_mit_Facelets.pdf.
> The dojoFacelets are apache licensed and we would love to make
them a
> starting point for a new MyFaces subproject.
>
> Here's a link to the documentation:
http://j4fry.org/dojoFacelets.shtml
> (with links to examples and downloads - the JSF 2.0 example is
currently
> offline, check the JSF 1.2 example).
>
> Best regards,
> Ganesh
>
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> sure MyFaces 2.0 is not yet there, but I want to share an idea...
>>
>> Since JSF 2.0 has the new Facelets support to easily create
(custom)
>> components,
>> would it be a good idea to start a new (sandbox) project that
defines
>> a JSF 2.0 set
>> of components, only written via the Facelets way ?
>>
>> I had to play with some fancy JS (jQuery) to make a "wow" *easy*
>> component (via Facelets).
>> I think it would be cool to have such a library that provides a
kinda
>> wrapper for some JS lib,
>> e.g. jQuery.
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
