It all depends on your definition of 'component' and there is no universally accepted definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component In Tapestry a component is packaged, parameterized combination of a class, a template, and a spec. The parameter declarations define the interface. You drop it it in the page, set the parameters and voila the component renders content (PageLink) or acts as a execution control mechanism (Conditional/For). That's it. The Tapestry definition of component does not allow for programatic insertion or deletions of components from a page tree at runtime. gaz's definition of 'component' is the ASP definition of component. Tapestry is not really an ASP component based framwork, it's not really a JSF component based framework. It is a Tapestry component based framework. end of story. Geoff On 1/26/06, Richard Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > gaz jones wrote: > > ivano: i think you slightly missunderstood my example, maybe it wasnt > > particularly clear. i would not be developing a componet to display a link > > that i would like to use in a page, i would be developing a component that > > inherits from AbstractComponent and needs to have links to other pages > > inside of it. now i would assume that i could use the components that have > > already been written to do this -> PageLink for example but i cannot because > > they cannot be instantiate directly in code. so i am forced to repeat > > functionality that PageLink provides within my own component. which leads me > > to think, this is not a true component based framework. > > > It would be unusual to inherit from AbstractComponent and want to output > significant amounts of HTML. Instead inherit from BaseComponent and > provide a html template, and then adding a link using the existing > PageLink component is trivial. > > > imo that is a major disadvantage, as it prevents you from dynamically > > creating components that are made up of _other_ components when you inherit > > from AbstractComponet - that is a REAL pain. and something you can do easily > > in other component based frameworks. > > > However, I suspect that you want to create components on the fly, and > you are right, Tapestry does not do this. Components (and pages) are > statically defined, but dynamic in execution (e.g. using conditionals, > and runtime determination of Blocks to render, but all the Blocks must > be predefined). You can choose to say that Tapestry is not really > component based because of this lack of feature if you like, others may > disagree. > > Cheers > > Richard > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- The Spindle guy. http://spindle.sf.net Get help with Spindle: http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/spindle-user Blog: http://jroller.com/page/glongman Feature Updates: http://spindle.sf.net/updates --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
