On Tue, April 19, 2005 12:53 am, Martin Cooper said:
> To get beyond doing the grunt work yourself for Ajax, I recommend taking a
> look at this:
>
> http://dojotoolkit.org/intro_to_dojo_io.html
>
> and downloading the dojo.io package from their site.

It does look cool.  However, in some ways what I provided is actually
better... I have the concept of default return handlers (and default
submission handlers) that would save the developer, in some percentage of
situations at least, from writing ANY server-side code whatsoever.  True
enough, one could implement that concept with Dojo too, but then I'm just
helping develop Dojo!

> Personally, I'm not convinced that we need anything new in Struts to make
> using Ajax easier.

Easier for who?  For you?  You are a super-genius Martin :)  It's a
cakewalk for you.  For me too frankly.  *I* certainly don't need new tags
because I don't even use the tags as they are now 95% of the time!

Let's look at it this way... I don't consider the validation framework to
be any great shakes.  I mean, the client-side portion of it anyway.  I
don't need tags that can write validation logic for me.  I suspect you
don't need it either.  Was it a bad idea then?  Most certainly not!  Same
thing here... if we can provide to 80% of the people a capability that
requires so very little extra work for them (a single config file and a
single attribute on any tag involved) that will handle 80% of their needs,
why in the world wouldn't we jump at the chance?

> I'm building products today that make extensive use of
> the two technologies together, and haven't found a need to enhance Struts
> to
> do it.

You and I both :)

> However, if we do add any Ajax (or Ajax-like) support to Struts, I
> want to be able to plug in my plumbing of choice (which would be Dojo
> right
> now) to get the most robust communication scheme available.

And that is a reasonable point I feel.  But, then you get into a situation
where you have to build something more complex in all probability to
provide that degree of flexibility... I have to make sure it is generic
enough to handle any plumbing you want to put in, and then what happens
when some new plumbing comes down the pipe that doesn't quite fit?

I would rather take the tact "here is an available method to do this AJAX
stuff, here are the limitations, and when you bump up against them you
will have to use something else".  I just don't see that as a bad thing
because it helps some people now, as opposed to helping no one, or more
precisely, leaving them out to entirely help themselves.

P.S. - Take a look at my proposal again... If you really wanted to use
Dojo, I believe you could with just one minor change: I would have to
allow for calling custom functions when submitting to the server.  This
was on the slate anyway, and that means you could use your dojo.io.bind()
stuff here).

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to