On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 22:31 +0200, Anton Gavazuk wrote: > Hmm, > good idea about comparison... I will try. > But what I don't like in tiles - separate config, in Stripes ( > action-based framework) you just define layout in one JSP and in any > particular page just substitute some components in base layout - as > for me very good approach, you don't have to support many config > files. > > It seems that you prefer JSF 1.2 to Facelets, am I wrong?
No, I think that Facelets is fine. The main project I work on uses Facelets, and I'm perfectly happy with it. I guess I'm just a little put off by what seems to me to be over-hype of Facelets sometimes. It was *far* better than JSF1.1+JSP, but doesn't seem to me to hold a great edge over JSF1.2+JSP. The pain of getting Facelets auto-complete working with Eclipse put me off a bit, but that will get better over time. Getting the taglibs set up for JSF extension libraries can be awkward if the lib doesn't natively support Facelets (eg MyFaces Tomahawk). And having dived into the Facelets code, the complete lack of comments (and apparent community) is not encouraging. But Facelets does work well. The templating is elegant (though not terribly original). Not having an ugly code-generation step (jsp->java) is nice. It seems to me that people now have two reasonably good choices; neither is perfect but neither is bad. Regards, Simon
