> > > So for those specific issues are we to say: > > > http://martijndashorst.com/blog/2007/04/16/javascript-animation-libraries-compared/ > > Is the future??
in this case, take a look at http://wicketstuff.org/confluence/display/STUFFWIKI/wicketstuff-animator ;) gerolf Matej Knopp-2 wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this question has been asked here numerous times. The thing is, there > > is in fact no real alternative of wicket-ajax for us. > > > > Wicket is not built about Ajax widgets.Wicket is about server-side > > components that can be partially updated using Ajax. That's a > > fundamental difference. > > > > As for the features, wicket-ajax has numerous advanced features such as > > - asynchronous pipeline that allows loading dependencies in > > asynchronous way, yet respecting the order (unlike e.g. dojo where the > > depending javascript are loaded using synchronous http requests which > > block entire browser = usability disaster) > > - ajax channels that allow you to stack or drop pending requests > > - multipart ajax response for replacing multiple components in one > > response, ajax header contribution processing (so that component can > > render header response as it would normally do, wicket transparently > > processes it and loads all dependencies (javascript references, > > stylesheets, etc) in an asynchronous way while respecting the order) > > - wicket-ajax.js is about 7kb compressed (with stripped down > > comments). As this is a general purpose ajax framework, the size > > matters. For sites where you using ajax only on certain places, having > > a 200kb javascript dependency would be quite a burden > > - there's more to it, the code is quite well documented, if you are > > interested you can dig into it, also you should search achives, this > > has been discussed here already. > > > > -Matej > > > > > > On 9/5/07, bmarvell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Hello all, > >> > >> This is my first post so please be gentle ;) > >> > >> I'm a user interface developer (no Java) working on what will > inevitably > >> be > >> a fairly heavy Ajax wicket project. After looking at a number of Ajax > >> examples and pre built widgets I have to say I'm a little puzzled! Why > >> does > >> wickets core JS framework not use one of the main JS frameworks that > are > >> available such as jQuery, Dojo or Prototype? I believe you have a hand > >> rolled version of mootools (although I may be wrong). Do the Wicket > core > >> team plan on supporting and enriching this hand rolled framework alone? > >> Surely it would make more sense to choose one of the main JS frameworks > >> that > >> have dedicated teams of devs supporting it? > >> > >> Also I've found that Ajax widgets in wicket seem quite "here and there" > >> in > >> their implementation. Some demos use prototype, some use YUI (a > >> datepicker > >> for example). Doesnt this go against what JS frameworks are trying to > >> provide? Choosing a decent framework such as jQuery or Prototype will > >> give > >> the developer a solid toolkit on which they can build, so extra > >> components > >> such as datepickers or custom widgets can be applied as "Plugins". > >> Sticking > >> to one framework reduces hits to the server, bandwidth, load and > >> processing > >> times all of which imho are good things. > >> > >> My worry at the moment is that the demos in wicket are very "lets get > it > >> working on the frontend" and not "lets think about a framework and its > >> rich > >> functionality". > >> > >> SO to summarize :) are there any thoughts about using a single, > supported > >> framework in wicket and moving forward from there? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Ben > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> http://www.nabble.com/JavaScript-Frameworks-tf4383060.html#a12494810 > >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/JavaScript-Frameworks-tf4383060.html#a12495715 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
