I think everyone should be allowed to use the tools they want to use......and I think people should do what they are supposed to be doing.
Webdesigners/HTMLers should work on the templates and design and programmers on Java code. Webdesigners should work with the tools they know and are familiar with.... I don't want programmers to Slice HTML and I don't want designers to compile Java code..... But if design changes make it necessary to touch the Java code there is an error by design.... -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:53:05 +0200 > Von: Martin Makundi <[email protected]> > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: Things I miss in Wicket > All you need is a RAD IDE that co-operates well with the typesafe wicket. > > ** > Martin > > 2009/1/16 Tobias Marx <[email protected]>: > > I think there already a lot of projects out there that try to optimize > web-development in Java. > > Instead of starting yet another project I think it would be better to > find out which framework is most > > flexible and has the best design architecture and philosophy and support > this project. > > > > So far I have looked at Tapestry5 and Wicket. > > > > What I don't like about Tapestry is, that it is currently not possible > to write web applications that allow you to "create webapplications", > meaning that you can not read the "configuration" of a form from the database > and > create all kinds of components dynamically. For example I wanted to > implement an Admin page in which you can define custom fields (for a > configurable > community website)...but this is not what Tapestry5 was designed for. > > > > What I don't like about Wicket is, that it is like writing normal Java > applications - although rich clients applications are being replaced with > web-based solutions and there is a fundamental difference between > web-applications and normal java applications. If you have a java application > as a > product, it is normal to employ software developers that work on bug fixes and > new features all the time - they constantly develop and it is > expensive....everything has to be done by a software developer. > > > > An ideal web-application is developed once and the Java code is never > touched again for 3-5 years until there are a lot of new features > necessary.... but in this time there could be several small changes or > complete > re-designs...and in that time this should be a pure matter of HTMLing without > the > need of touching the Java code. If a new input field is added or some new > strings.....or whatever....or maybe a new Flash component etc....this > should still work without changing the -war file that carries the Java > code...only changes in the templates or the database should be made. > > > > Wicket does does not really allow this. Or assume you have a > web-application you want to sell - and don't want the customer to know > Java....they > would be really restricted in the changes that are possible. Another > advantage of Wicket is that it creates a session for every visitor - no matter > whether it is a crawler/search engine that does not need a session or a logged > in user.... > > > > If there was a coding competition to write a web-application with as few > lines of code as possibleI think Tapestry5 would win over Wicket. But with > some changes in Wicket and some aspects of Tapestry5, this would be a lot > better. > > > > What about merging Wicket and Tapestry? Similiar to Wicket with Tapestry > templates----? > > > > So far most of my projects are still good old PHP code....stupid but > efficient. It loads fast when you use file or memory based caching, you can > always resolve any kind of bug within minutes and you never end up debugging > for 5 days until you find out that it is not possible without any > fundamental changes in the core of some Java framework you do not wish to > know in > detail...... > > > > So long... > > > > Toby > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > >> Datum: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:46:08 -0500 > >> Von: Trevor Burnham <[email protected]> > >> An: Tobias Marx <[email protected]> > >> Betreff: Re: Things I miss in Wicket > > > >> Hi Toby, > >> > >> I've been considering creating a new project that would split away > >> from Wicket, refine it and streamline it for similar reasons, > >> particularly to reduce the number of lines of code that are needed for > >> common use cases, to make things easier on designers, and to provide > >> more seamless interoperability with other popular libraries (e.g. > >> Spring). Do you think you might contribute to such a project? For now, > >> I'm just testing to see if there's interest. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Trevor > >> > >> On Jan 15, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Tobias Marx wrote: > >> > >> > Hi there! > >> > > >> > There are some things in Wicket I am missing and I think they could > >> > improve the framework a lot..... > >> > > >> > But just some small background first: > >> > > >> > In my opinion the most important things in a web application are: > >> > > >> > - as few lines of code as possible, as many as really necessary > >> > > >> > - separation of design and web application code and logic > >> > > >> > - if a webapplication changes in the design or some small items are > >> > added this should be possible without needing a java developer.... > >> > > >> > > >> > Therefore I would like to suggest more intelligent templates in > >> > Wicket: > >> > > >> > 1. Pass parameters inside of wicket components eg: > >> > > >> > <div wicket:id="myComponent" paramA="blabla" paramB="blabla2"></div> > >> > > >> > and make them accessible in the Java code. > >> > > >> > This is a way to customize and reuse components purely by editing > >> > templates > >> > > >> > > >> > 2. Make Strings/Labels accessible directly in templates....to avoid > >> > redundant code like this: > >> > > >> > add(new Label("indexTitle", .....) and instead allow to add > >> > properties directly. > >> > > >> > 3. Pick up components automatically without needing to add them in > >> > the Java code: > >> > > >> > add(new LastPostsPanel("lastPostsPanel")); > >> > add(new NewsPanel("newsPanel")); > >> > > >> > This could be matched automatically > >> > > >> > I think Wicket could be better without so much redundant copy&paste > >> > code...by improving templates.... > >> > > >> > Thanks for listening... > >> > > >> > Toby > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > 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] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
