Maybe this presentation will be interesting for the jsf developer. http://blog.tapestry5.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/JSF-2.0-vs-Tapestry-5.pdf
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Ivano Luberti <lube...@archicoop.it>wrote: > I forward to the list what a jsf developer has written to me: I'm > working with him on a project where he has to develop the web > application and I'm working on a web service consumed by his web > application. > > I had forwarded to him a message by Thiago that was trying to point out > differences between T5 and JSF. > The interesting thing he has to say is about facelets as a way to use > standard XHTML templates inside JSF. > Also the difficulty to use together different component sets is > interesting: reminds me of the issue with different JavaScript > components in T5. > > But what really surprises me is the similarity he found between struts > and JSF > > > -------- Messaggio originale -------- > > Hi Ivano, > > We do indeed use JSF for our web development and more specifically we > use Icefaces which is a set of AJAX enabled components and AJAX push > framework which sits on top of JSF. We chose to use JSF because it > wasn't too dissimilar from Struts which we were using before. Generally > we find it very good although it does have some shortcomings but they > don't tend to get in the way too much. We are using JSF 1.2 but JSF 2.0 > is now available and adds support for some of the things on your list > such as, you can now use annotations for lots of things you use to have > to use XML for, there is also the addition of page level scope as per > the tapestry idea. One point the tapestry guy is wrong about though is > that with JSF you don't have to use JSP, that is only one option. We use > facelets which is now part of the JSF 2.0 spec so if you use that you > code directly in XHTML using the relevant faces tags, thus the problems > that came from using JSP as a display layer disappear. > > With JSF you get a choice of which component set you want to use, or I > believe you can use multiple but then configuration becomes more > challenging. We looked at a number including Richfaces and Woodstock and > decided that Icefaces offered the best set of components. All three of > those are open source though so are completely free to use, although > support is available too. > > Unfortunately I don't know a great deal about tapestry so I can't really > say how it compares to JSF, I think you'd have to evaluate them both and > decide which one is easier for you to work with based on your previous > experience. > > Hope that helps, > Darren > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Best regards, Igor Drobiazko http://tapestry5.de
