John McNally <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 20/10/2002 04:29:17 AM: [snip] > As much as I hate it, JSP is the recognized standard for webapp > development. Jakarta's development of a general purpose java templating > technology, Velocity, is a valid alternative and is not even in direct > conflict with JSP. But it is a simple, powerful alternative to JSP as > well. Does tapestry give us another alternate template system that is > only usable within the framework?
No, and that's where tapestry is different. Tapestry is a component framework, not a template engine. Think Swing components as an example. > Granted I could try to investigate Tapestry in depth to answer all my > reservations, but I'm busy and on the surface the project seems to > overlap several existing projects. My -1 is not a statement that > Turbine (or Struts, Velocity, Avalon) should not have any competitors > within Jakarta. I would prefer that Tapestry make the case that it > offers something that these projects do not and I don't think the > original proposal makes the case forcefully enough. I've looked @ Tapestry in quite a bit of detail, and it does offer something different to Struts and Turbine, in that it focusses squarely on components and reuse. There is a dearth of reusable components for Struts, simply because the JSP model doesn't lend itself to components very well, hence JSPTL and JSFaces. Turbine has good component support for non-GUI components, but the template engine again doesn't lend itself to component embedding and reuse. My 2c Aus.... -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Work: http://www.multitask.com.au Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:general-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:general-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
