Thank you for your input Scott. I have noticed the same trend in my encounters with JSF.
-----Original Message----- From: Scott Swank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 2:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Wicket vs. JSF/Seam (The Dead Debate) When we chose between JSF and Wicket our conclusions were: 1. JSF is more compact because tags involve fewer lines of code than Java components. 2. Wicket is much easier to extend than JSF. An example is in order. We sell a customer a hotel room reservation & tickets to two different shows. We need to get the name of the person checking into the room and the person picking up the tickets. Since these are usually the same person we want to use JavaScript to capture the first/last names entered for the 1st item and populate them in the subsequent items. In Wicket this was a simple Behavior that we coded right up. Creating analogous new functionality in JSF is much more work. (I'm not saying that JSF doesn't have some lovely way to accomplish the above, rather I'm pointing out that creating new functionality that JSF doesn't already enable is significantly more work.) 3. When we developed sample apps in Wicket & JSF the Wicket app was complete in 1 week, while after two weeks the JSF app was struggling with technology decisions and ultimately incomplete. This was in spite of the fact that many of us had developed in JSF before, while no one had done any development in Wicket. 4. The developers and users on the Wicket e-mail list are insanely helpful. Cheers, Scott --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
