Actually GWT does not generate HTML, it generates DOM objects. The difference is perhaps being picky, but I think it is important.
Attaching GWT event handling to existing HTML is not something that should be attempted. David On Wednesday 25 April 2007 06:25, Jonathon -- Improov wrote: > David, > > > I am not at all sure what you mean by "tight coupling with the HTML". > > GWT generates its own HTML code (the events, especially). GWT also > generates the javascript codes (the event handlers). I can certainly use > the generated javascript codes verbatim. But I'd have to somehow tweak my > OFBiz form/screen widgets to connect them to the javascript codes. > > The problem is that GWT produces the HTML code for both events > (onMouseOver, onClick, etc) and the actual UIs (aka controls, in SWT > terminology). If, instead, GWT doesn't require the use of controls, but > just simply requires the definition of events, it could be simpler to do. > > As it is now, it seems I have to do 2 things: > > 1. Create UI/controls with GWT, > > 2. Create event handlers with GWT, > > when I only want to do step 2. > > Still, you're right that I could do my own utterly stripped down controls, > since I only want to program the event handlers and not the controls > themselves. > > I'll look into this GWT soon. > > > What I was reacting to was the thought that getting Javascript > > expertise into OfBiz might be difficult, > > Well, when situations create a need, we adapt. I've been doing OO > Javascript for some time now, no problems. Yes, I did go through > programming language study (parser, interpreter, compiler), but I think > there are many FAQ guides on the web. Just ignore the discussions about > scope and closure (which really is quite easy to grasp, if we just sit down > and try). > > > doing things in Java makes a lot of sense. > > It does, since Java is a much easier language than Javascript. I felt a > load come off my shoulders when I moved from a PHP project to a Java > project! I think I could've gotten stress-related health problems if I > handled PHP for much longer. > > > Personally I find Javascript to be a problematic language > > It is. What we can do with SWT (concurrency controls) cannot be done with > Javascript. Or maybe I just haven't figured it out yet. > > Jonathon > > David Goodenough wrote: > > Tim, > > > > I am not at all sure what you mean by "tight coupling with the HTML". > > As you never (or should never) write any HTML as part of the GWT code > > this makes no sense. Yes the GWT controls are mapped to HTML, but you > > can make your own controls quite easily, and integrate them into the > > GWT framework so you are not limited to what simple HTML widgets can > > do. > > > > But I am merely a bystander when it comes to OfBiz, so it is for others > > to decide. What I was reacting to was the thought that getting > > Javascript expertise into OfBiz might be difficult, and so doing things > > in Java makes a lot of sense. Personally I find Javascript to be a > > problematic language, it is very powerful, almost too powerful - you can > > almost redefine the language as you go along - but being interpreted and > > not type safe in the way that Java is makes it a much more difficult > > language to use well. > > > > David > > > > On Tuesday 24 April 2007 14:39, Tim Ruppert wrote: > >> David, we did a number of pilots with GWT (and other frameworks) in > >> OFBiz and were much happier with the dojo toolkit. The GWT, while > >> having the bonus of being able to do everything in java, also > >> required a bit more of a tight coupling with the HTML - which in my > >> mind - made it less desirable. > >> > >> JSON is there in case you can show us all a better way of handling > >> it! Hope that helps. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Tim > >> -- > >> Tim Ruppert > >> HotWax Media > >> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > >> > >> o:801.649.6594 > >> f:801.649.6595 > >> > >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:06 AM, David Goodenough wrote: > >>> Jonathon, > >>> > >>> Probably the best approach would be to write an xslt script which > >>> would > >>> parse the OfBiz XML descriptors and generate skeleton code which could > >>> then be subclassed to put in specific processing (it may be > >>> possible to > >>> generate the whole thing, I have not looked closely enough). I am > >>> thinking > >>> of something like the juic system used by QtJambi - the new Java > >>> binding > >>> for Qt that Trolltech have currently in beta (juic was actually > >>> originally > >>> part of kdebindings but that is another story). > >>> > >>> It may sound odd, but actually it is best not to think about HTML and > >>> Javascript when coding GWT, it just complicates things. You can > >>> include > >>> explicit HTML or Javascript if necessary, but it is better to start > >>> from > >>> the position of doing it natively in GWT. It may be necessary (or > >>> desirable) > >>> to write some GWT code to emulate specific OfBiz widgets, I have > >>> not looked > >>> closely enough to find out. > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 13:22, Jonathon -- Improov wrote: > >>>> David, > >>>> > >>>> Seems to me the GWT will generate both the HTML (events) and the > >>>> Javascript > >>>> (event handlers). Is that correct? If so, I'd have to somehow > >>>> translate the > >>>> HTML output to OFBiz widgets. Still, GWT's support for coding in > >>>> Java is > >>>> cool. > >>>> > >>>> Yes, OFBiz supports JSON (via json-lib). I've been using it often > >>>> in Ajax > >>>> work with OFBiz. > >>>> > >>>> Jonathon > >>>> > >>>> David Goodenough wrote: > >>>>> You ask about whether there are Javascript experts around. Of > >>>>> course > >>>>> if you were to use GWT (Google Widget Toolkit), you do the > >>>>> programming > >>>>> in Java and it is translated into Javascript. That way you get > >>>>> all the > >>>>> strict typing of Java but the implementation on the browser without > >>>>> addons. GWT is of course now entirely open source and integrated > >>>>> into > >>>>> Eclipse quite easily. > >>>>> > >>>>> As I read it much of what is needed for using GWT is already > >>>>> present in > >>>>> Ofbiz, GWT can use JSON as its comms protocol and I think I am > >>>>> right in > >>>>> saying that JSON is supported by Ofbiz. You could use SOAP but > >>>>> JSON is > >>>>> lighter weight and as the execution environment is javascript is > >>>>> the more > >>>>> native protocol. GWT does have its own RPC protocol as well, in > >>>>> which > >>>>> case you would have to write the server end in its environment, > >>>>> but there > >>>>> is no requirement to use it, JSON (or even native HTTP) will do > >>>>> perfectly > >>>>> well. > >>>>> > >>>>> David > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 04:33, Jonathon -- Improov wrote: > >>>>>> I was actually looking to pump in my enhancements to the Widget > >>>>>> module. > >>>>>> I've incorporated some Ajax-facilitating or Ajax-related features > >>>>>> directly into the Widget module, so I won't have to do HUGE .ftl > >>>>>> (s). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Imagine being able to use and reuse a widget-screen for 2 (or more) > >>>>>> purposes: non-ajax operation and ajax operation (pulling down > >>>>>> various > >>>>>> sub-sub-parts of the screen). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In general, I was able to make all listings screens (with the > >>>>>> Prev/Next > >>>>>> hrefs) load via Ajax. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But be warned that this Ajax approach, if carried further, could > >>>>>> hark > >>>>>> back to those times when you programmed Java AWTs for rich UIs > >>>>>> (events > >>>>>> and concurrency). Except there's lots of javascript involved in > >>>>>> this > >>>>>> case, not Java, and bad news is there's no concurrency controls in > >>>>>> javascript. Which means, prepare to get wickedly good at > >>>>>> acrobatics in > >>>>>> javascript (obscure acquired taste, really), or deal with the > >>>>>> potential > >>>>>> mess and meltdown. Please let me know if there's any experts in > >>>>>> javascript OO and programming here. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm willing to help with Ajax-ing OFBiz. Just let me know if the > >>>>>> "nice > >>>>>> addition" Andrew's talking about will go into Opentaps or OFBiz, > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> I'll follow. I only need to know if there's any anti-trust case > >>>>>> against > >>>>>> the body I'm contributing to. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Jonathon > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Andrew Zeneski wrote: > >>>>>>> This sounds like it will be a nice addition to OFBiz, I can't > >>>>>>> wait to > >>>>>>> see the progress! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andrew > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Apr 23, 2007, at 4:59 PM, Si Chen wrote: > >>>>>>>> If there are any developers interested in working on a CRM > >>>>>>>> system, > >>>>>>>> we're looking for more help here at Open Source Strategies. > >>>>>>>> We have > >>>>>>>> both full-time openings and part-time paid opportunities, and > >>>>>>>> you can > >>>>>>>> work from home and set your own hours. You'll have a chance > >>>>>>>> to work > >>>>>>>> with us on a combination of client projects, our open source > >>>>>>>> products, > >>>>>>>> and just cool stuff you're interested in. > >>>>>>>> We're especially looking for developers with strong > >>>>>>>> familiarity with > >>>>>>>> the following areas (though not necessarily just these): > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1. Front end development and Ajax > >>>>>>>> 2. Integration with external devices, such as mobile phones, > >>>>>>>> handheld > >>>>>>>> devices, etc. > >>>>>>>> 3. Analytics and reporting > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If you're interested, please drop me a note off the list. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Scott A wrote: > >>>>>>>>> David, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Like I said, I am a user plain and simple so I can’t get into > >>>>>>>>> all of > >>>>>>>>> the technical side of things. All I know is that I would like > >>>>>>>>> a CRM > >>>>>>>>> portion of > >>>>>>>>> ofbiz similar to how Sugar CRM works but with a good and > >>>>>>>>> solid email > >>>>>>>>> client > >>>>>>>>> built in. I guess it would take someone with the interest and > >>>>>>>>> technical ability to put the requirements together first. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> That said, I can only contribute with my wants and needs and > >>>>>>>>> some > >>>>>>>>> cash. I'd > >>>>>>>>> be willing to throw $1000 into the hat to get this type of > >>>>>>>>> functionality. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Where do I go from here? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> David E. Jones-2 wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 6, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Scott A wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> I have some help from some service providers setting up the > >>>>>>>>>>> system > >>>>>>>>>>> and we've > >>>>>>>>>>> already started to work on the gui which includes Ajax for > >>>>>>>>>>> easier > >>>>>>>>>>> use. There > >>>>>>>>>>> are also many other options I'd like to have for my > >>>>>>>>>>> business and > >>>>>>>>>>> that hopefully I could give back to the ofbiz community too. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Do you guys have any kind of bounty system or a wish list > >>>>>>>>>>> where > >>>>>>>>>>> likeminded > >>>>>>>>>>> people could collaborate and get things done at a quicker > >>>>>>>>>>> pace? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> For example, I'd like to see a good CRM in the core of > >>>>>>>>>>> ofbiz with > >>>>>>>>>>> something > >>>>>>>>>>> like zimbra being used for the calendaring and email. If > >>>>>>>>>>> this were > >>>>>>>>>>> even > >>>>>>>>>>> feasible and there were likeminded people who would be > >>>>>>>>>>> interested, > >>>>>>>>>>> then we > >>>>>>>>>>> could pool our resources and time, etc. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Any suggestions? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> We don't have a bounty and bid system setup right now, but > >>>>>>>>>> hopefully soon or at some point some commercial entity in > >>>>>>>>>> the OFBiz > >>>>>>>>>> community will do just that. It is something we have talked > >>>>>>>>>> about, > >>>>>>>>>> and even using OFBiz to manage it, since about year 2 of the > >>>>>>>>>> project and I think it would be a really great thing for the > >>>>>>>>>> project, and for everyone who participates in both funding and > >>>>>>>>>> developing different things. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Right now the best thing to do is send a message to this > >>>>>>>>>> list or > >>>>>>>>>> the dev list to see if anyone is interested in > >>>>>>>>>> collaborating on > >>>>>>>>>> this and has enough of a business requirement for it to at > >>>>>>>>>> least > >>>>>>>>>> help to fund involvement on their side. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> My guess for something this specific and yet large in scope > >>>>>>>>>> (ie in > >>>>>>>>>> terms of the amount of work required, probably a few weeks > >>>>>>>>>> worth) > >>>>>>>>>> no one will be able to participate for the "fun of it". > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Who knows.... maybe someone will step up and agree with you > >>>>>>>>>> on how > >>>>>>>>>> cool it would be and start banging on it with you. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -David
