Ronald, I am a bit confused that MyFaces and Shale both implements JSF. Why you need to use both? why not use one of them? What about Struts-Faces? It integrates Struts and JSF. Do you consider it?
On 11/14/05, Ronald Holshausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I use Shale, Tiles and MyFaces. The main reason for moving over is > that JSF is being pushed by Sun as the standard for J2EE user > interfaces, and is getting picked up by some of the big companies like > Oracle, so I think it will gain a lot of momentum and support from > most vendors. I also like the fact that your backing java beans don't > need to implement any interfaces or extend base classes, which leaves > your presentation java code more independent of the JSF APIs. > > On 14/11/05, pc leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ronald > > > > I am also thinking of switching to JSF. Do you use Shale, MyFaces or Sun > > JSF? > > Any reasons your company starts to use JSF as I am standing at the > > cross road of Struts and JSF? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > On 11/14/05, Ronald Holshausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > I have switched from struts to JSF for our companies product > > > development, as I can say that JSF is totally CSS oriented. Each > > > control has a CSS class as a property, and a lot of the tomahawk > > > components provide their own base CSS classes by default (have a look > > > at the tabbed pane from tomahawk as an example). > > > > > > I agree with you about the mock-ups. With our development, the process > > > starts with the graphic artists who do the demos and new product > > > concepts in pure html and CSS with tools like Dreamweaver, etc. Then > > > the developers convert the HTML to JSPs and write the backing java. > > > This works the same with struts and JSF. > > > > > > Have a look at the clay component from shale, as this supports this > > > type of development process more fully as you could then use the > > > generated HTML from the graphic artists directly, just add some ids > > > much like Tapestry does. > > > > > > On 12/11/05, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I know there are some leading edge JSF and Shale gurus who monitor > > > > > this list. I > > > > > have a basic > > > > > question: Can rich web application interfaces be created in JSF? > > > > > > > > > > I've looked at MyFaces and Tomahawk (http://myfaces.apache.org/). The > > > > > source > > > > > code that can be > > > > > found in the examples at http://www.irian.at/myfaces/home.jsf is > > > > > perplexing. I > > > > > see data tables, > > > > > panel groups, and panel grids for the page layout. I do not see > > > > > standards based > > > > > CSS design. I > > > > > don't see how you could create rich web application interfaces with > > > > > externalized > > > > > styles using JSF > > > > > components. > > > > > > > > > > I know the concept is that JSF components can be "rendered" for > > > > > different > > > > > viewing devices; > > > > > however, I'm not sure the creators of JSF really thought through the > > > > > process of > > > > > how most web > > > > > applications are created. I think the usual case is that a mock up of > > > > > the web > > > > > interface is > > > > > created by marketing execs and web designers, then that mock up is > > > > > "wired" by > > > > > software engineers > > > > > (in our case we use Struts for the wiring). CSS design is very > > > > > advanced (see: > > > > > http://www.csszengarden.com/). It is unrealistic to think companies > > > > > are going > > > > > to retrain their > > > > > web designers on a new technology that is less capable then the one > > > > > they are > > > > > currently using. > > > > > > > > > > As a specific example, the use of such tags in JSF as, > > > > > " > > > > " is > > > > > horrible. > > > > > > > > > > I think JSF has missed the mark. Rather than tossing out Struts I > > > > > think Sun > > > > > should have enhanced > > > > > Struts by creating a simple process for plugging in web components > > > > > (perhaps some > > > > > sort of enhanced > > > > > Tiles strategy) and they should have also enhanced Struts by adding a > > > > > better > > > > > page flow process > > > > > (similar to Spring WebFlow). > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that if you take a better look at JSF, you might see Struts, > > > > Spring and a reusable visual component framework. To see this you have > > > > to look beyond the basic semantics. So, maybe a forward is called a > > > > navigation rule and validation is component based verses form based. > > > > > > > > I've always seen Struts as building blocks for the rest of the > > > > application. It provides the foundation, a starting point. Each shop > > > > seems to pick and choose different extension points to exploit. > > > > JSF provides the same model where extension points in the framework are > > > > configured via a configuration file. The framework guts can be swapped > > > > with a side of a configuration files. JSF expands on this by providing > > > > an API for building visual components that have characteristics of > > > > event oriented programming in a request response architecture. The > > > > component API is a starting point. > > > > > > > > The fact that the reference implementation delivers a number of vanilla > > > > components is a strength but maybe a weakness. The component API > > > > should be seen as building blocks and not as absolute offering. I > > > > don't think that Struts would have lead as many projects to success if > > > > the developers could not have seen how to take advantage of is > > > > swappable parts. > > > > > > > > > One of the most promising projects for web application frameworks is > > > > > a project > > > > > named, "Clarity" > > > > > (http://www.jsfcentral.com/listings/A6020?link). The goal of this > > > > > project is to > > > > > consolidate and > > > > > enhance existing frameworks. I hope this is the path to nirvana. > > > > > > > > > > I like the JSF concept of pluggable components. My major problem with > > > > > JSF is > > > > > the design strategy > > > > > that states an application is a collection of components and these > > > > > components > > > > > have renderers for > > > > > different devices. I suppose that you could try to wrap CSS design > > > > > around > > > > > "" tags if you > > > > > are creating a web application, but this seems contrary to the JSF > > > > > model. > > > > > > > > > > Please share some guiding thoughts. Especially, if you have a link to > > > > > some cool > > > > > example pages > > > > > created with JSF, I'd like to see them. > > > > > > > > > You might take a look at the Shale "rolodex" usecases. You will see > > > > some fun CSS action delivered using a JSF view. It's all done using > > > > only two custom components and a few JSF extension points, the rest is > > > > vanilla RI. > > > > http://svn.apache.org/builds/struts/nightly/struts-shale/ > > > > > > > > > Thx. > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > > > Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. > > > > > http://farechase.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 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] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
