I only started looking at JSF a couple weeks ago, and I am convinced it's a better presentation-tier web framework than STRUTS. Nonetheless, my current project is STRUTS-based, and it's much easier if I can plug bits and pieces of JSF into the application we are working on.
Backward compatibility has always been important in IT. The more dominant and successful the technical predecessor is, the more important it is to maintain backward compatibility to ease developer transition. I feel that JSF is overall a better framework, but the fact is that Sun, and other JSF vendors have offered little to help developers to transition from STRUTS. Warren -----Original Message----- From: Sean Schofield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 10:35 AM To: MyFaces Discussion; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: JSF vs. Struts I think a big problem for JSF is that there are some crucial things missing that most web developers take for granted. Most of that is being addressed in JSF 1.2 but that is a long ways off. Two big ones jump to mind. The clientId problem was big for me. That's why I added forceId. Nobody wants a framework changing their element ids when trying to write complicated javascript. Also, the verbatim thing is really awful. Once that's fixed you will get lots more people jumping onboard. I understand its a complicated problem, but the JCP folks also need to understand that will be a major turn off to many web developers. I like to work with the cutting edge stuff and there is plenty of benefit to using JSF now. But if you are less adventurous, you may want to wait until JSF 1.2. There will also be a lot more components to use by that point. sean On 8/10/05, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Zhai, Warren [IT] wrote: > > Just to add my 2 cents. JSF would have been much more successful if it did > > the following: > > > Well the main problem JSF had, was in the beginning sort of that people > looked instantly for their known Struts constructs (which were there but > differently solved and better solved imho) and did not find them > although the stuff looks very similar from the outside and then said it > was not good enough. > > The other thing was, it was originally to little there component wise, > giving to few additional value for an early jumpstart and not that much > lighter on the config file level to give an incentive to switch instantly. > Pushing out a JSF 1.0 with a huge component set which covers all the > stuff needed for a good webapp would have been a clear winner, now it is > slowly a winner but not a clear one. > > But given the fact that the tool vendors jump on it in masses and the > tools really make the life easier. JSF has a serious impact, and most > misunderstandings now have been solved either by components, extension > frameworks or simply by better documentation, JSF has lots of momentum, > at least that is my impression. > > > 1. Depict itself as a successor to STRUTS rather than a competitor. > > 2. Provided easier side-by-side co-existence and allow finer grained > > porting of a STRUTS application to the JSF framework. > > > Well coexistence frameworks exist, but given the fact that struts > has so many things broken, it is better to take the existing good things > of struts and try to solve the broken ones by a clean cut, instead of > dragging the old stuff around for another decade. > JSF in its current state is a very solid foundation and one of the > better standards, it just needs additional value in the core, which > MyFaces ADF faces and others deliver currently outside of the core. > > >
