On 6/30/06, Michael Turyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Xap does replicate some of Dojo's functionality simply because any
UI/event description has to do a few things; however, it's intended to
be a wrapper and extender for _anybody_'s widget system...at the very
least, this allows you to keep a page description which is
vendor-neutral, giving you more freedom to change later on.
I'm interested in your thoughts on how well this is really going to work.
For example, one toolkit might have a data grid that supports draggable
column ordering and resizing, data binding, auto-pre-fetch, in-place rich
text editing, etc., while obviously not all toolkits are going to have that
support, so I can't just switch underlying toolkits (unless XAP is going to
provide the missing support ;). It doesn't have to be anything as fancy as
that - even simple features are likely to be implemented sufficiently
differently across toolkits that a common interface won't work. And most
toolkits have different ideas about how layout and containers should work,
too. So does that mean that XAP will provide the lowest common denominator
in terms of functionality, or will switching toolkits just now work in many
cases?
--
Martin Cooper
Consider: what if you want to adapt a dhtml-based page for a
voice-server? After you find equivalents for what UI pieces you can
(text-to-speech for outputted text, voice prompts for fields,
recognisers for "OK" and "Cancel" buttons,...) you could keep the same
.XAL and replace components one-by-one, something even Cocoon can't do.
Xap also makes it relatively simple to add, delete, or replace elements
in your U.I. after loading---large pieces of interface can be predefined
and loaded in as needed in response to triggered events.
Xap will give you macros, and more importantly (IMarrogantO) a namespace
for managing objects ("mco"s); a single mco can point to complicated
pieces of code, allowing for better modularity in describing what you
applications do.
I hope that this has been of use; someone else jump in to fill in the
(probably large) chunks I've left out, and correct anything I've got
wrong....
========================================================
M. Turyn
Software Engineer, Nexaweb Inc.
"Enterprise Web 2.0 Solutions - Thinner, Richer, Faster"
-----Original Message-----
From: C. Grobmeier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 4:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Scope and Templating
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Cheers guys,
i am playing with ajax at the moment and try out dojo. i was curious why
i should use XAP some time? Meaning, it seams you are building a kind of
scripting language (like XUL) based on dojo. Why are you not simply
using dojo? What will be the advances?
When i have this xap script, is this also a templating engine? I am
using tiles at the moment, can i think about xap as a replacement for
tiles? or is it an extension?
Sorry for my dump questions, maybe you could enlighten me a bit :-)
Cheers,
Chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEpOG0kv8rKBUE/T4RAkBTAJ9uwGngeQ/k2qRjqAtHtIBJyEb2rgCfSOrg
xEqx24E8OQ8sC1EH/z6OG+A=
=/wjK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
