Hi Stefan, By coincidence I use Spring MVC along with GWT. Spring controllers do not have to handle business logic. For example in my current app I have the following architecture:
Model: Domain + Services View: GWT + JSP (i18n and other stuff) Controller: GWT event handlers (client) <-> Spring MVC controllers (server) Like VladS said, you can't abstract the i18n aspect completely from the server. Besides that, my point was that compiling the whole code base per browser * locale, just doesn't feel right. So why not do the whole thing in one place and more efficiently? :) On May 23, 6:00 pm, Stefan Bachert <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I do not agree with you. > > First of all, my concept of an application is the "ingenious" variant > of MVC. In the ingenious variant "control" means taking users input > (That is not the same role as Spring Web MVC perceives a Controller > where Controller means marshalling and doing business logic. The first > is trivial, the second is just wrong). However, regarding to your > topic this difference is not really important. > > Control is user input, gathering data > View is presentation of data for the user > Model is/are the domain object(s) > > Control and View live on the client > Model live on the server. > > So for me i18n is in general a pure presentation affair which belongs > to the client. It is the client how decides which language is > appropriate, not the server. > In my application view server side is heavily related with the domain > object, and they do in general not depend in users locale. > > So it is perfectly OK to apply i18n on the client. And this approach > is quite fast. > > On the other hand, you don't have to use the GWT i18n mechanism at > all. > And you could use the Constants-Interface and implement it by a class > which ask the server for values. This might be appropriate when you > for some reason are not able to supply stable translations of your > labels and titles. However, your application startup will slow down. > > Stefan Bacherthttp://gwtworld.de > > On 23 Mai, 04:46, dmen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I wanted to start a discussion about this as I usually get this ugly > > feeling when ever I take on GWT i18n . To begin with, I believe that > > internationalization is, inherently, a server side issue, so solving > > it on the client is the wrong way to do it. Moreover, the way it is > > done, by compiling the whole app separately per browser and per > > locale, screams overkill. In general, I think that GWT's feature of > > deferred binding should be used with more chariness than it currently > > is. What do you think? > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
