On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Gonzalo Aguilar Delgado <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm just implementing a widget frontend rendering. While still missing > some important features it all seems to work well. > Even changing servers (shinding in another server) rendering is correct. > This is because you did it really well. > > It took me some time to figure out the rave client initialization > sequence (rave javascripts) but now works... > > I have to say that the html code changes drastically. It's more simple. > Much more. > > But it comes with no problems. Major one is layouts implementation. > Wicket is not so "dynamic". But some fragments will do the work well > without much effort. I hope. > > This is how it looks for main page: > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/117301646173740678910/albums/5635868114523664673/5848794662437168866 > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/117301646173740678910/albums/5635868114523664673/5848794664675677762 > > > I have to do all the Rave styling and add missing things (admin, > marketplace, multipage, etc). But now that rendering is working it > should not be a problem. > > I plan to maintain it when it's finished.
Very cool. In my opinion, we should move toward a much more flexible front-end model where developers such as yourself should be able to use something like wicket if they choose, but someone else should be able to to use a pure HTML/JS front-end with REST services. > > Question is. Should you accept this frontend? > > Kindest regards, > Thank you for your support.
