And, Josh, last time I looked JSP was not on the list we are talking about. So, what was your point?
On 12/13/05, Josh McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Last I checked servlets / jsp were part of J2EE. > > -- > > "His comrades fought beside him, Van Owen and the rest... > But of all the thompson gunners- Roland was the best." > > Josh McDonald > Analyst Programmer > Information Technology > Ph: 61 7 3006 6460 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14/12/2005 4:31:21 pm >>> > Preston, none of those examples are J2EE. They can be used with J2EE > but > they have nothing to do with anything beyond J2SE. > > > On 12/13/05, Preston Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I don't know what the future will hold. JSF may win the day on > nothing > > > but marketing alone. It has the force of being a "standard", and > while > > > not all standards ultimately succeed, it certainly is a leg up on > other > > > > I would argue that with Java (J2EE specifically) "standards" have > largely > > just "emerged". Think of all the examples. > > > > Tomcat > > Ant > > Struts > > JUnit > > Hibernate > > > > That's, by and large, the "standard" J2EE toolkit. And by that I mean > that > > while we may have WebSphere, Tapestry, Maven, EJBs, etc. there's a > certain > > concensus out there and the tools in the first list are what have > the > > mindshare now. > > > > So my point of interest is this. JSF, from what I'm seeing here > > (especially when the actual developers of Struts talk about their > reasons > > for jumping to JSF) and reading elsewhere is actually succeeding IN > SPITE > > of the fact that it's not sitting in the OpenSource non-standard > seat, as > > Tapestry is. I find this interesting. It was bound to happen > eventually, > > that one of Sun's reference implementations would actually become a > > standard. I know, EJB is a standard. But look how many people have > been > > abandoning that in favor of more lightweight solutions, once those > > solutions presented themselves. > > > > So I think the fact that JSF is getting traction IN SPITE of the fact > that > > it isn't quite as open, hasn't been open sourced as long as Tapestry, > etc. > > is a testament to the fact that developers appear to like it. I just > > wanted to know (and you all have been immensely helpful in this > respect) > > if you could get done with it, what you can with Struts. Thus the > question > > wasn't "Is JSF better than Struts?" The question was "Is JSF ready?" > > > > And that is the question for me. I know what I can and can't do in > Struts. > > I've been programming with it for 5 years. I know its power and I > also > > know I've been involved with some amazingly convoluted hacks to make > it do > > what we needed. A framework that handles more of the > request/response > > plumbing for me is welcome. A framework where *maybe* I can use tools > that > > are WYSIWYG if I want is appealling after 5 years of hand-coding XML > > descriptor files that are gigantic. A framework that handles requests > and > > responses and doesn't push as far back into the business tier is > welcome > > to me. > > > > So I like the idea of JSF. Just like I like the idea of Tapestry and > even > > Ruby on Rails. I just wanted to know if you could write a JSF app > today > > and be reasonably sure that you could do easy validation on the > server, be > > relatively efficient in it and not run into major snafus with > application > > server differences. > > > > Preston > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its > back." > ~Dakota Jack~ > > > > > > > > *************************************************************************** > Messages included in this e-mail and any of its attachments are those > of the author unless specifically stated to represent WorkCover > Queensland. The contents of this message are to be used for the intended > purpose only and are to be kept confidential at all times. > This message may contain privileged information directed only to the > intended addressee/s. Accidental receipt of this information should be > deleted promptly and the sender notified. > This e-mail has been scanned by Sophos for known viruses. > However, no warranty nor liability is implied in this respect. > > **************************************************************************** > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back." ~Dakota Jack~
