Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application.Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, Iwould not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such anHTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers- basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very bigname behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technologyto make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your jobeasier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642___Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easierDownload IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
hmmm can't use itWe have to target that shitty mac (sorry guys ;) ) and it seems that the default browsersafari doesn't work as far as i could test.johanOn 5/18/06,
Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The doctype is xhtml transitional. But there's an additional comment(!-- --) before doctype to trick IE and make it work in quirks mode.(Because in standard compliance mode IE uses the W3C box model, which
sucks).This should work with strict too. Also ?xml header would do this, butwicket is kind of reluctant to print it, so i just put comment there).So far, this setup works (tested) for Firefox, Opera, Konqueror,
IE5.0+.Only thing i'm not sure with is IE7. If it won't be fooled by commentbefore doctype and won't allow to set box-sizing in standard compliancemode there will be a problem. I hope MS engineers are sane enough to
implement box-sizing css property, which is currently supported by anydecend browser (except for IE of course).-MatejJohan Compagner wrote: So you are saying that it is possible to support many browser to get
border-box? hmm that would solve so many problems we have... So you let IE stay in quircks mode and have for firefox that -moz-box-sizing: border-box; and for other browsers (maybe IE7) the CSS3? standard: box-sizing:
border-box; What is your doctype? johan On 5/18/06, *Matej Knopp* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Igor Vaynberg wrote: allow myself to quote...myself || imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser
apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model
is broken. The box model really is broken. Therefore I always stick with IE box model * { box-sizing: border-box;
-moz-box-sizing: border-box; } The only thing to take care of is not to allow IE6 to work in standard-compliance mode. So far, I had no problems with this setup. I'm
doing quite complicated layouts using just css (no tables) and everything works fine. I just hope that IE7 won't screw everything up. -Matej -Igor
On 5/17/06, *Johan Compagner* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java...
hmm that is not how i see it. CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing.. And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is
sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse) johan On 5/17/06, *Igor Vaynberg*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser
apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is
how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with.
matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser
screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html
you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look.
-Igor On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann *
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I
might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their
entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application.Since someone
else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.
Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework
such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To:
wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:
wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit
integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org
http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers -
basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user ---Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easierDownload IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642___Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
The only thing to take care of is not to allow IE6 to work in standard-compliance mode. So far, I had no problems with this setup. I'm doing quite complicated layouts using just css (no tables) and everything works fine. I just hope that IE7 won't screw everything up. Judging from the posts on the GWT list, IE7 screws up a lot, including that framework :) Surprise, surpise, it's MS! Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Eelco Hillenius wrote: The only thing to take care of is not to allow IE6 to work in standard-compliance mode. So far, I had no problems with this setup. I'm doing quite complicated layouts using just css (no tables) and everything works fine. I just hope that IE7 won't screw everything up. Judging from the posts on the GWT list, IE7 screws up a lot, including that framework :) Surprise, surpise, it's MS! Yeah, i'm not that surprised, really ;) The only thing to figure out is how to keep IE7 in compatibility mode while sending the xhtml docttpe. xml... parsing bug does it for IE6 now, hope someone will find such thing for IE7 too. -Matej Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=kkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
So you are saying that it is possible to support many browser to get border-box?hmm that would solve so many problems we have...So you let IE stay in quircks mode and have for firefox that -moz-box-sizing: border-box;
and for other browsers (maybe IE7) the CSS3? standard: box-sizing: border-box;What is your doctype?johanOn 5/18/06, Matej Knopp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Igor Vaynberg wrote:
allow myself to quote...myself || imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model
is broken.The box model really is broken. Therefore I always stick with IE box model* {box-sizing: border-box;-moz-box-sizing: border-box;
}The only thing to take care of is not to allow IE6 to work instandard-compliance mode. So far, I had no problems with this setup. I'mdoing quite complicated layouts using just css (no tables) and
everything works fine. I just hope that IE7 won't screw everything up.-Matej -Igor On 5/17/06, *Johan Compagner* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java... hmm that is not how i see it. CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing..
And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse) johan
On 5/17/06, *Igor Vaynberg* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is
how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its
nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop
space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look
how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better.
But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear
on every page of each web application.Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.
Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2
that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco
Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:
wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at
haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers -
basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing
applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and
some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web
services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server
v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642
___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
---Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimohttp://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642
___Wicket-user mailing listWicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Igor Vaynberg wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. Well, next time also look into the FormLayout of the JGoodies (Forms) fame. It's easy to do by hand, even easier if you use the factories and builders it provides. Excellent library JGoodies, it's my choice as a layout manager for the desktop. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org http://haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Well, next time also look into the FormLayout of the JGoodies (Forms)fame. It's easy to do by hand, even easier if you use the factories and builders it provides. Excellent library JGoodies, it's my choice as alayout manager for the desktop.sure, but html is about much much more then just form layout.-Igor
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
smallufo schrieb: Google Web Toolkit - Build AJAX apps in the Java language released on 5/16/2006 http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/ It seems powerful and slick Had a quick look at it. It is a small but complete framework. Everything is written in Java, even the GUI components, which are compiled into Javascript+HTML. There is a remote procedure call interface that allows arbitrary serializable java objects to be sent to the client, even exceptions. I can't say much on the Java to Javascript+HTML compiler, but it doesn't seem to be such a good idea. Java 1.5 is not supported, and the rich set of java libraries can't be used. It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), but I don't really believe in this concept. It is very difficult to abstrahize the features (or should I say quirks) of different browsers. Some months ago, I had a look at several javascript libraries and it worked pretty flawless in every browser. When I checked again this week, one browser simply crashed. On 2 of 4 pages. It's sad, but it's just not stable enough for me. The GWT demo site worked fine, but custom components will be very tedious to develop and maintain. Another issue is previewability. Not just for a designer, but for debugging purposes. If you click view source in your browser on a GWT page, you will see nothing but a HTML skeleton and an iframe. Anybody has any idea to integrate it to wicket ? Integration into wicket doesn't seem feasible to me. It might be possible to integrate GWT widgets into a wicket page, but I think it makes more sense to use wicket components in combination with a client side ui library like the yahoo ui library. The effect will be the same, but you only have one type of component to take care of. But I don't know if wickets AJAX support is good enough yet. Timo --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), but I don't really believe in this concept. It is very difficult to abstrahize the features (or should I say quirks) of different browsers. Some months ago, I had a look at several javascript libraries and it worked pretty flawless in every browser. When I checked again this week, one browser simply crashed. On 2 of 4 pages. It's sad, but it's just not stable enough for me. The GWT demo site worked fine, but custom components will be very tedious to develop and maintain. To their defense, it seems they use this library for some of their major apps (including gmail?), so I think they invested a lot in making it work on as many browsers as possible. I think developing custom components will be pretty doable too, though I would miss the model part. I would hate the idea of having to talk to a service layer for anything I do. Another issue is previewability. Not just for a designer, but for debugging purposes. If you click view source in your browser on a GWT page, you will see nothing but a HTML skeleton and an iframe. Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. Anybody has any idea to integrate it to wicket ? Integration into wicket doesn't seem feasible to me. Not sure either. I don't believe in integration for marketing purposes only - let JSF do that ;) If good ideas come up, I wouldn't be against it of course. My fear is that the framework is too monolythic/ covers too much for integration. For that reason I never tried to integrate DWR, though I like that framework too. But I'm not totally sure, as I just looked at GWT at the surface. Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
RE: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Yeah, imo there are many things to say for keeping close to the actual markup. Eelco On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well.the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look.-IgorOn 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoyprogramming in Echo2 better.But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to theirentire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application.Since someone else ismaintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want totranslate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2that abstracted away the HTML completely?-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of EelcoHilleniusSent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.netSubject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ..Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically thesame promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developingapplications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT lookslike a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, andsome cool innovations. ... Eelco ---Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimohttp://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___Wicket-user mailing listWicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Agreed. But what I find very encouraging about these frameworks is that they are object component (widget) oriented. I hope they'll be a great succes just for the reason of getting rid of most java frameworks which are to my taste just horrible (whether they are 'flow' oriented, 'stateless' or just xml heavy). Eelco On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java...hmm that is not how i see it.CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing..And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse)johanOn 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look.-Igor On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoyprogramming in Echo2 better.But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to theirentire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application.Since someone else ismaintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want totranslate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2that abstracted away the HTML completely?-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of EelcoHilleniusSent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.netSubject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ..Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developingapplications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT lookslike a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, andsome cool innovations. ... Eelco ---Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___Wicket-user mailing listWicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
allow myself to quote...myself|| imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well.i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model is broken. -IgorOn 5/17/06, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java...hmm that is not how i see it.CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing..And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse)johanOn 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look.-Igor On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoyprogramming in Echo2 better.But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to theirentire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application.Since someone else ismaintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want totranslate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2that abstracted away the HTML completely?-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of EelcoHilleniusSent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.netSubject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ..Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developingapplications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT lookslike a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, andsome cool innovations. ... Eelco ---Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___Wicket-user mailing listWicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
You see Igorwe're not so different...you and I. I agree...and simply because we're building web applications we're likely to be working with web designers and web developers who are well versed in markup CSS and are able to take part of the application maintenance upon themselves. Using a pure-code framework can put a lot of design layout work on the developer and help to reduce the division of labor...which isn't necessarily a good thing. On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: allow myself to quote...myself || imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model is broken. -Igor On 5/17/06, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java... hmm that is not how i see it. CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing.. And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse) johan On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
RE: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
I think it would have been a good thing if the web had begun this way. After all, builders of retail-quality fat-client software products have always been able to use non-programming professional designers (when they were willing to pay for them). There's no need for graphic artists to contribute actual code. But the way things have developed, we're going to have to integrate HTML-based components from time to time. It's sort of like the reason serious programmers for so long had to use C or C++ instead of Pascal. It takes a lot of trial and error to develop a framework which, like Java, is so complete that access to the lower levels is unnecessary for most users. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vincent Jenks Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 4:53 PM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? You see Igorwe're not so different...you and I. I agree...and simply because we're building web applications we're likely to be working with web designers and web developers who are well versed in markup CSS and are able to take part of the application maintenance upon themselves. Using a pure-code framework can put a lot of design layout work on the developer and help to reduce the division of labor...which isn't necessarily a good thing. On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: allow myself to quote...myself || imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model is broken. -Igor On 5/17/06, Johan Compagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java... hmm that is not how i see it. CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing.. And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also (not recommended ofcourse) johan On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well. the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work with. matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have none of these things. look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look how rectangular their examples look. -Igor On 5/17/06, Frank Silbermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy programming in Echo2 better. But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with links to their entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this fragment to appear on every page of each web application. Since someone else is maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would not want to translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy. Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML scrap into a Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such as Echo 2 that abstracted away the HTML completely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Eelco Hillenius Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ? It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org if you find it interesting), ... ... Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers - basically the same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still prefer using HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago. GWT looks like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name behind it, and some cool innovations. ... Eelco --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642 ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
allow myself to quote...myself
|| imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser apps. add
css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well.
i never said css was great for layout manager :) and yes the box model
is broken.
The box model really is broken. Therefore I always stick with IE box model
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
-moz-box-sizing: border-box;
}
The only thing to take care of is not to allow IE6 to work in
standard-compliance mode. So far, I had no problems with this setup. I'm
doing quite complicated layouts using just css (no tables) and
everything works fine. I just hope that IE7 won't screw everything up.
-Matej
-Igor
On 5/17/06, *Johan Compagner* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ha! and css is easier then layout manager in java...
hmm that is not how i see it.
CSS is just plain horrible stupid box thing..
And what is a layout manager in css? There isn't one everything is
sort of absoluut positioned and then you can do in swing also
(not recommended ofcourse)
johan
On 5/17/06, *Igor Vaynberg* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
imho, html is the best layout manager out there for browser
apps. add css to the mix and you have a great skin manager as well.
the one thing you always hear swing developers bitching about is
how they have to fight the layout managers to get the results
they want. gridbaglayout is poweful but its a huge pain to work
with.
matisse+grouplayout are the holy grail for swing devels, its
nice and easy to create layouts. but it still requires a gui to
do this, while i can do html easily by hand. also browser screen
space doesnt translate easily to the desktop space. in desktop
space you are pixel aware, you are also pixel aware of your
fonts and the south east corner of the window. in html you have
none of these things.
look at wingS framework examples, they use layout managers. look
how rectangular their examples look.
-Igor
On 5/17/06, *Frank Silbermann * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I, personally, don't care for HTML, and perhaps I might enjoy
programming in Echo2 better.
But suppose an employer maintained an HTML fragment with
links to their
entire portfolio of web applications, and wanted this
fragment to appear
on every page of each web application. Since someone else is
maintaining that scrap and keeping it up-to-date, I would
not want to
translate it into Echo 2 and maintain my own copy.
Would it not likely be easier to incorporate such an HTML
scrap into a
Wicket application, versus one written in a framework such
as Echo 2
that abstracted away the HTML completely?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of Eelco
Hillenius
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:58 AM
To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
mailto:wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Google Web Toolkit integration ?
It's certainly an intriguing idea (have a look at haxe.org
http://haxe.org if you find
it interesting), ...
...
Yeah. I see some advantages of using layout managers -
basically the
same promise as Swing has - but currently I would still
prefer using
HTML for layout. If I would like the GWT way of developing
applications, I would have choosen Echo 2 a long time ago.
GWT looks
like a next gen Echo to me, though with a very big name
behind it, and
some cool innovations. ... Eelco
---
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web
services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to
make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on
Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid0709bid3057dat1642
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnkkid%120709bid3057dat%121642
___
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
mailto:Wicket-user
