on 5/9/2000 5:08 AM, Maciek Kaminski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> right...i think that is taking things to far. i think it makes the code
> to
>> complicated for others to work with. especially newer engineers...
> This is a matter of taste. I can't think of any more smiple way to
> express this.
I can. Look at Scarab.
> It is a matter of implementation. I may use (some) template
> system during rendering stage.
>
> I agree that look customization is important problem with this
> approach. It still needs a lot of ideas/work.
You say you "may", but so far, you have not shown that you are going to do
that.
I'm glad you agree with me, but the end story is that we have already tried
what you are doing and it doesn't work for the large majority of the people.
:-( Yes, it works if you are one person doing a project, but not for a
distributed project.
> People who have some experience in Swing programming find it
> easy.
How many web designers do you know that have experience in Swing
programming? Not even all Java software engineers do..including myself. Nor
do I have any desire to.
> Again, It is a matter of taste. It is one piece of code. In
> screen/action model one needs two classses.
Again, I repeat myself. That is on purpose!
> It does not make much sense to use components for simple
> things. They make things simple when you want something
> complicated:
>
> public class Table extends DefaultPaglet implements Paglet {
hey, it's cool if you just want to go this route, but if you want to join a
different crusade, I suggest that you try out the WM stuff instead.
:-)
-jon
--
Java Servlet Based - Open Source | Collab.Net
Bug/Issue Tracking System | now hiring smart people
<http://scarab.tigris.org/> | <http://Collab.Net/jobs/>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
