Kent Tong wrote:
Numa Schmeder <numa <at> euroconsumers.com> writes:
I am also voting for an abstraction layer, dojo slows thing down and
is not always fully compatible with all browsers and version.s Keep
in mind that tapestry is used for public website and not only
intranets where you can control the client's browser.
Its not the download time, its the bootstrapping on each request which
makes things heavy...
I think we should have an abstraction only when we need two or
more implementations. But the current case is not like that. So
I don't see a compelling reason to do that.
If one does not need widgets but "just" wants to use EventListener and
async requests, maybe also client side validation, why not let the
programmer/community the ability to choose a JS framework implementation -
I don't have much experience with scriptacuolus but it seems fair enough
to me to use - prototype has also some listener implementation, and as
much as dojo may be supperior, we pay a price for it, which we don't
have to pay... more important: it apears to me to be a solid criteria in
choosing a web framework - for a "normal" site, I find it hard ro
recommend a framework with such a slow responsiveness...
Cheers,
Ron
If you're concerned with dojo code bloat, T5 may by default use
a bare minimal dojo.js. For each component that uses extra
dojo functionality, it can output a dojo.require('dojo.foo')
to bring in the extra Javascript. I believe such code is
still cached by modern browsers
(http://dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/2005-December/001259.html).
This way, if you don't use such components, you won't pay
the price.
--
Author of a book for learning Tapestry (http://www.agileskills2.org/EWDT)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
