Hi Chuck, Simon, and all WOrriors, I certainly understand your concerns and they are valid. WO is already a very expressive framework and you have a work process that simply does what you need. You are agile and get things accomplished. You don't have a need to try something new. I also understand that if you were to try this there would be major growing pains because your workflow currently uses a raw .html file with little webobjects tags you ask the UI people to ignore.
I had the same concerns a few years ago but threw concern to the wind for non-serious projects so I could give it the benefit of the doubt. For me it was enough to see some smart discussions on their equivalent of WOCommunity and see killer apps come to market like "DabbleDB." I took the leap of faith and can now visualize it better. To be honest my very first impression was that this was a "cop-out" design decision. I really thought they did things this way to obviate the need of creating a template system. It wasn't until really trying it out that I could see how wrong that assumption was. This is no simple high school project framework, it's a well laid out approach. You are right Simon, if the HTML being output does not have enough syntactic sugar as in http://www.csszengarden.com/ then the UI people will be nagging the programmers. It will cause issues. But fairly quickly I would think programmers will learn what is necessary and overall flow will be improved. Usually it is not "id" tags but classes and nested spans / div tags that are necessary. The following two posts are pretty succinct and illustrate this novel approach eloquently. http://onsmalltalk.com/page-templates-and-seaside http://onsmalltalk.com/ajax-how-to-build-cascading-dialogs-in-seaside The second post is particularly interesting as it shows how Ajax is very sensibly added to your application. He says he didn't do any "javascript" and it's true that he himself did not but the extra expression in the web framework did it for him. Just like EOF creates SQL for you or even Mike's WO Ajax framework can automatically observe a field and update a part of the screen without you writing javascript directly. Blur your eyes and try to see the difference using a new Webobject tag with various bindings for an AjaxObserveField versus this method of accomplishing the same goal. It is eye opening. -- Aaron Simon <[email protected]> wrote on 09/29/2011 03:28:05 AM: > From: Simon <[email protected]> > To: Chuck Hill <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], WebObjects Mailing List <webobjects- > [email protected]> > Date: 09/29/2011 03:28 AM > Subject: Re: Finding WO people for startups (cult of the dead) > > >> renderContentOn: html > >> > >> html table: [ > >> html > >> tableRow: [ > >> html tableData: [html text: 'Table entry']]; > >> tableRow: [ > >> html tableData: [html text: 'Table entry']]]. > >> > >> Look foreign? Perhaps but it's worth getting your feet wet and > kicking these ideas around. I've seen many things and this is the > first set of tools and processes that make me feel good. Like it is > equivalent and perhaps better than WO. It's brain dead easy to > install and there are a number of tutorials out there. > > > > OK, I see what you are talking about now. I am not sure if that > is a win for me. I have this designer that I often work with and he > is able to take an Eclipse project and edit the .HTML files to make > design changes. He does not touch the WOD or the Java. This has > been working pretty well for us. Switching to Seaside would mean > that we would have to take the initial designs, convert them into > code, and have the developers maintain them through the inevitable > changes. I'd have to see how much time the rest of it would save me. > > totally agree. this is not a plus for us either. our UI people play > with html (we don't do wod's, 100% inline bindings), and our java > people play with Java. > > the thought that our java team would have the UI team on their backs > all day saying "er, can you change that <table>, <tr> and <td> mess > you're pumping out for a list please (like i told you last time)" > fills me with fear! > > even if you keep your UI people to tidy up with css, surely they are > going to be nagging java engineers to get the correct id's and classes > pegged to the html the java code is pumping out ? it seems this is > only a benefit if your java people actually look after the whole UI > piece as well - and i've yet to find a java engineer that has style. > no offence intended :-) > > Simon
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
