AjaxAnywhere and Ajax4Jsf both work "out of the box". They have different strengths and weaknesses. Both are made for partial page refreshing, not any kind of AJAX API necessarily.
Ajax4Jsf is geared more towards JSF and is dedicated to migrate to the JSF Avatar once it is released (where JSF Avatar is the JSF built in specification for AJAX in JSF 2.0). AjaxAnywhere is a sourceforge project that supports both normal JSP and JSF. It is very simple in that it only has really one control (aa:zoneJSF) and it is hard to create controls on top of as a result (it is a tool more than a framework). It has been out longer (to my knowledge) and as a result may be more stable. If I were to start a new project, I would probably look into A4J (I am using AA right now). It is a nice stop gap until Avatar becomes available. You can also look at IceFaces [1]. It is a free or commercial (depending on functionality desired) product that also does AJAX that took a much different approach. It has an API that lets server side components modify the client DOM "directly". It looks really nice, but to my knowledge isn't the way that Sun/JSF is moving towards with Avatar, so I'd be more hesitant to use it. Either way, they all work, are all good, and should work for you no matter which you choose. The only issues may be in some integration between implementations and libraries. -Andrew [1] http://www.icesoft.com/products/demos_icefaces.html On 8/23/06, Shekhar Yadav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks everyone for input. but I am little confused. So there is no framework still that works completely out of box. I thought my requirements were most basic ajax requirements... regards, Shekhar Martin Marinschek wrote: > Hold on, hold on. > > The PPR technology we devised for integration into tomahawk is > server-side compatible with what Trinidad does (also what the user has > to do to get it working and the developer interface is similar to > Trinidad). > > The client-side is completely rewritten, but we hope that we will be > able to integrate this into Trinidad as well, as the client-side code > of ADF-Faces is still dependent on the rather outdated IFRAME > approach, and we wanted (and for consistency needed) to use dojo. > > In any case, I definitely think that MyFaces tomahawk needs a working, > reliable, directly integrated AJAX framework to have any future as a > component library - everything else put aside. > > regards, > > Martin > > On 8/22/06, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Double? Don't you mean triple, quadruple or maybe even quintuple? >> >> Between MyFaces, JSF-RI, Struts, Tiles, Shale, Shale-Clay, Facelets, >> JBoss-Seam, EJB3, Hibernate, Spring, AjaxAnywhere, Ajax4Jsf, Trinidad, >> Tobago, and others it is amazing that new developers even try to learn >> the technology instead of saying I give up. >> >> I like options, but I wonder if we are stretching open source >> developers too thin on continuously reinventing the wheel. >> >> On 8/22/06, Rogerio Pereira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > >> > 2006/8/22, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > > > Also a short note, Ernst Fastl is working on something similar >> > > > as we speak, it will be called partial page rendering >> > > >> > > that name sounds familar... >> > > is the goal now double everything? >> > >> > >> > i agree >> > >> > >> > >
