Not very far at all :) Most of the impl has already been done, it will need
to be completely re-done the new way, but that's just monkeys typing on a
keyboard.

The design is all sitting up in my head. I just need subversion access and a
reasonable plan/ok from the general community and we're off :)



On 12/1/05, Dan Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> very rough estimate, how far do you think tacos and tapestry are from
> this kind of thing? what are the major limitations blocking it?
>
> On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 15:31 -0500, Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
> > I think the tacos4 approach has changed from 3.0.3 in kind of an apples
> and
> > oranges sort of way. The things you mentioned are being addressed:
> >
> > -) The only area in tacos that requires people to acknowledge javascript
> > code is the ProgressBar.
> >
> > -) All exceptions, client-side AND server side are being handled in a
> very
> > transparent and easy way in tacos. Any server exception will pop open a
> > FloatingPane with all of the gory details.
> >
> > -) The debug console makes debugging what's going on as easy as
> debugging
> > anything else in java. The javascript framework that we're using, dojo,
> has
> > a built-in logging backbone similar to log4j in the way that it let's
> you
> > control things. The debug console utilizes this to provide a
> FloatingWindow
> > (hideable or showable, also supports clearing log entries/color coded
> log
> > message types, etc..) that makes this much much easier to work with.
> >
> > I don't agree with completely about Tapestry only being able to support
> the
> > concept of pages. I think the portlet code is a very good example.
> In  fact
> > I think the internals of tapestry look more like swing code than any
> other
> > web framework I've seen thus far, and if you've ever done a lot of swing
> > (rendering with Graphics) objects you'll know what I'm talking about.
> This
> > is the largest part that I would like to focus on with tapestry. It
> already
> > supports direct renders of "areas", save for one tiny little part, which
> are
> > Loops. This is already being addressed so I'm fairly confident we'll be
> > seeing some very impressive new functionality soon-ish.
> >
> > My last and final point would be that a very large and driving goal
> behind
> > tacos has been to eliminate the need for anyone to understand what any
> > javascript has been doing on the page, as well as what's involved in
> most of
> > the process. I think what's sitting in cvs head for tacos4 right now
> does a
> > pretty good job of doing that.
> >
> > The other part(ok so one more point) that gives me a great deal of
> > confidence is that tacos has tried, in every circumstance to defer all
> > javascript to the http://dojotoolkit.org javascript library. That makes
> our
> > risk of introducing bugs/ability to quickly move forward much easier
> than
> > lots of custom javascript.
> >
> > It's also funny that you mentioned some of the big names around who has
> been
> > working with ajax. I think everyone would be very surprised/relieved to
> > learn just who exactly is using the library(dojo) as well as who
> actively
> > develops it's contents. I can't say(or even know) all the players
> involved,
> > but if anyone is familiar with Flickr, one of the original pioneers of
> the
> > whole "web 2.0" style of doing things (ajax included) you'd be happy to
> know
> > that one of their lead developers is also an active contributor to that
> > library. Basically, dojo has an intensely
> > dedicated/knowledgeable/experienced set of industry leaders driving it's
> > development, which I personally think makes it the best choice
> around...I'm
> > just happy that tacos has been able to bridge the two worlds somewhat.
> >
> > jesse
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

Reply via email to