Frank Silbermann wrote:

> Just glancing at your link for a few seconds, and reading the earlier
> comment that it looks like ASP.NET with VS.NET, I would guess that Web
> Objects provides a library of components that you can paint onto your
> pages, automatically generating the custom tags in your HTML file.

Yes, but you don't have to do it that way.

> Suppose you are customizing a component by setting many properties, and
> using it with those settings on fifty different webpages.  In Wicket, I
> can create a method which instantiates a web display object, sets its
> properties and returns it.  I can then call that method every time I
> want to instantiate a web object with those settings.

You can, of course, do that with WO as well.

> What facility does Web Objects provide that lets you avoid having to
> re-set those properties fifty times? 

... and however you choose to construct your "web display object" it is 
(naturally) also a component that can be used as a building block for 
other "web display objects".

> (Isn't the inconvenience of adding slightly-customized variations of
> components to the toolset the reason most Swing GUI programmers end up
> building their GUI in code instead of using some IDE's graphical
> GUI-painter?)

Most people just don't want to change their way of doing things (and 
some graphical GUI-painters are not very good).

You seem to think there is only a fixed and limited set of components to 
work with - why assume something like that?


> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anders
> Peterson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 12:51 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] WebObjects open source?
> Not sure what to say... it makes me productive...
> It's not really fair to compare Wicket and WebObjects (WO). WO is a
> whole package of frameworks and tools that function well together (but
> can be used independently). Wicket needs team mates to replace WO
> entirely.
> With Wicket any html and java editors will do just fine. This is
> generally a good thing (I think) but it's also a restriction. With
> WebObjects the tools are part of what makes the package great:
> Start up the WOBuilder tool, create a WODisplayGroup instance and start
> (visually) combining WOComponents and binding them to data. It's fast
> and intuitive...
> /Anders
> ilderGuide/
> bobjects/appserver/WODisplayGroup.html
> bobjects/appserver/WOComponent.html
> Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>> :) It's one of my favorite parts of Wicket, so sure.
>> What about the strong points of WebObjects, what are the things you 
>> really like about that?
>> Eelco
>> On 8/29/06, Anders Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Sure, if it has to be just like Wicket to compete; you win. ;-)

Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
Wicket-user mailing list

Reply via email to