Actually, the company where i work uses webobjects. It allows to make UI components (independant and configurable) and organize them in libraries (related to our products). Clients specific web interfaces are made of these 'standard' component + some graphic stuff.
It look great on paper, but in practice... WO is a proprietary framework with a long ObjC tradition (even if it is now 100% java). It does not follow MVC model and many hacks are needed to build some basic features. Do you think that JSF[+struts] is a valuable alternative? it seems to be a very 'young' technology. or Tapesrty ? regards, Frederic -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2003 01:34 An: Struts Users Mailing List Betreff: Re: Reusable Components On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Adam Hardy wrote: > Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 22:48:26 +0200 > From: Adam Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Reusable Components > > JavaServer Faces sounds like Tiles, Dynamic Forms and Validator rolled > into one - or does that miss the point? Sort of, since JavaServer Faces doesn't directly have an analog for Tiles or the Validator Framework (although it does support per-component validations). Struts does not really have any notion of a UI component that maintains its own state, or can have child components so that you can build complex things out of simple things. The closest analog is an individual property in a form bean (where Struts promises to save and restore state for you, and the HTML tags promise to render for you. The JavaServer Faces approach to these sorts of issues is substantially more powerful than what Struts offers -- the smallest difference being that we wouldn't need form beans at all if Struts were built on top of Faces. As I've said before, it's feasible for Struts folks to treat Faces simply as a replacement for the HTML tags, simply to get access to the richer rendering model and complex components, while continuing to use Struts features (tiles, validator, actions, ...). There's an integration library already available that can do that for you: http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/jakarta-struts/release/struts-faces/ The proof of concept was to take the standard struts-example.war sources, and convert the JSP pages (one page at a time) to use Faces tags instead, without touching the back-end actions. However, if you start from scratch with JavaServer Faces, you can achieve lots of the same separation between business logic and presentation logic that we're all familiar with. It's worth a look so you can start thinking about if and how to integrate this kind of thing into your own apps once it goes final (later this year). Craig > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > > > On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Frédéric Dreier wrote: > > > > > >>Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 10:13:02 +0200 > >>From: Frédéric Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>To: struts user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Subject: Reusable Components > >> > >>Hi, > >> > >>I really need your help and hints... I was not able to found something > >>related on internet. > >> > >>how can i make reusable 'high-level' components? taglib seems to be useless > >>for such components (that already use JSP's and actions). Tiles is exactly > >>what i need but it does not seems to work if sub-component JSPs are packed > >>in a JAR library.. > >> > >>Does anyone has some link or other resources about it? or even has another > >>solution? > >> > > > > > > Reusable user interface components is what JavaServer Faces is all about, > > and it can be used with Struts: > > > > http://java.sun.com/j2ee/javaserverfaces/ > > > > One of the features is exactly what you're asking for -- the ability to > > package up components, renderers, and the corresponding tags into a JAR > > file that auto-configures itself when you drop it into /WEB-INF/lib. > > > > > >>Thanks in advance, > >> > >>Frederic > > > > > > Craig > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
