On 14 Sep 2006, at 04:33, Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
Those aren't jsp/jsf tags. They are namespace references.
Indeed it seems to be the case that the new templates are well-formed XML documents and that any new elements are properly defined in a namespace. However, I don't think that's the central point being made here. The issue is that traditional Tapestry templates were composed entirely of standard HTML elements, but just with some attributes added. The new templates contain special Tapestry elements that are not standard HTML. This is a significant change.
Let me relate my experience of the "goal" stated in the original post, as this is the area in which I feel that Tapestry stands head and shoulders above all other frameworks. The difficulties with templating in project teams that involve professional designers are well rehearsed and I won't repeat them here. In Tapestry, I have evolved a mode of operation that works really well for me in certain contexts and with certain project colleagues. Essentially, this involves not touching the templates. At the start of the project, I provide a two-page document to the designer explaining what sort of things in the template will require components, what types of components exist and a naming convention for component IDs. Obviously I have to eyeball the first few attempts, make changes and give feedback, but after a few iterations, they tend to get it right. The templates contain nothing except the added jwcid attributes. I work off these on the Tapestry coding. One or two things are a bit fiddly and would probably have been easier to put in the template. However, the great thing about this approach is that the designer then "owns" the templates. They can get a separate version control module of just the webapp root (ignoring WEB-INF). In my experience, they are _blown away_ by this. They really can't get over it.
The real beauty here is that there is no preview mode for the designers, it's just a double-click. We've had situations where a designer has been able to tweak a template from a remote machine belonging to someone else with none of their regular software installed, by playing around with a few changes just using Notepad. And when the tweak was submitted, there was no "see if this works", because the designer already knew that the tweak worked. (And perhaps would not have been available to participate in a round of "see if this works" submissions and deployments.) And this was achieved on a machine with no specific software of any kind (other than a web browser).
The bottom line is that regardless of how powerful any new preview mode is, if it involves more than a double-click, it will be a step backward in some contexts. I realize that these are quite specific contexts but they have been ones in which Tapestry has really shone. The documentation also floats the idea of dispensing with the ".html" extension and storing the templates alongside the classes (possibly for page templates too?). To me, this suggests a programmer-centric view of projects and makes it more difficult to devolve an "Independent Republic of the Template" to the designers.
I'm impressed by pretty much everything else I've read about Tapestry 5. So a big "keep up the good work" to Howard.
Regards, Don Ryan. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
