Nice to see another naked objects framework out there, just a shame that you've built this separately from our community. It would have been nice to have your Wicket skills to allow us to take our own Wicket viewer further.
With respect to your request, I do take issue with some of the things you claim on your website [1] about the Apache Isis framework; however the main point is that the frameworks aren't that comparable because they have different scopes/objectives. For myself I would prefer that you don't have this comparison on your website, ie remove the fragment "In comparison to other naked objects frameworks like Apache Isis, ". What remains are then reasonable statements about your framework. But by including that fragment it suggests that the Apache Isis framework doesn't offer these benefits; I would say that it does. What you could do instead is include links to other implementations of the naked objects pattern (Apache Isis and OpenXava are the two main ones for the JVM, I believe). Perhaps you might say that these other implementations have different scopes/objectives, and then let the reader can judge for themselves? All that said, best of luck; as I say it's nice to have other implementations out there and it helps to have some friendly competition. Thx Dan PS: the second diagram on [2] comes from an old naked objects slide deck; I think that Richard Pawson drew it originally. Could you redraw it yourselves, please (or obtain Richard's permission to use it)? [1] http://invesdwin.de/nowicket/introduction?0 [2] http://invesdwin.de/nowicket/concept?2 On 12 April 2016 at 14:55, subes <gsu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there, I have a framework to announce that was built on top of Wicket > and Wicket-Bootstrap. It applies the Naked Objects pattern to generate HTML > files and the corresponding Wicket Binding for you based on your models. > All the while allowing you to fully stay in control and be able to do what > you are used to with Wicket and the components provided by > Wicket-Bootstrap. > > More info at the documentation website: http://invesdwin.de/nowicket/ > And on GitHub: https://github.com/subes/invesdwin-nowicket > > In the documentation I am talking about the difference to Apache Isis. > Mainly the difference is that NoWicket does not aim at going as deep as the > persistence layer for the models and does not want to be a full CRUD > framework. Also explaining what disadvantages that would have for wanting > to stay in control. With NoWicket you actually still have your HTML files > to edit and the Wicket Page and Panel implementations you can customize. > NoWicket just automates the boring coding for most needs and reduces the > amount of SLOC to write by a magnitude. > > Could you please check that I make no claims about Apache Isis that > are incorrect? > > Thanks! >
