On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Subash Chaturanga <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Umashanthi Pavalanathan >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > During an offline discussion with Luciano, we discussed about the UI >> > technology. Had two choices: dojo and jQuery; finally we decided to use >> > dojo, since it is being used in PhotArk UI already. In case if we need >> more >> > features we can get them from jQuery or some other library. >> >> What are the community thoughts about jQuery versus Dojo ? Should we >> consider anything other then dojo for the UI on the REST branch ? >> > > +1 for Dojo. > > When considering GWT over other well known js frameworks like JQuery or > Dojo, people who are good at front end designing, most of them comfortable > with having HTMLs to structure and style them with CSS(which is pretty clean > and straightforward ). But in GWT we are kinda forced to use decent MVC and > client-server design patterns which may have a bit of a learning curve for > new developers. > > So in terms of migration to GWT in REST, we should consider the adaptability > of it with our future PhotArk contributors. There is no such huge advantage > of using GWT over Dojo except for java developers. But there are many > developers who are from .NET, C++, PHP backgrounds. So such person might not > interested in understanding GWT and contribute to us. And also, as Suho > mentioned, we have the advantage of reusing front end codes straight away > from trunk if we stick to Dojo. > >
+1 for continue to use a JavaScript framework. I believe that, if you are doing a java application, use java, if you are doing a browser ui, use the native capabilities of the browser (html, javascript, css) which will give you the most flexibility. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
