I have always thought that Tapestry5 was classified as a
"Compontent-oriented" web framework and not as "MVC" web framework. I
tend to think that each page in a Tapestry5 app is a single stand alone
app that has components within it that respond to events. I even
sometimes think of Tapestry5 apps as RIA without the "R" if you use the
"zone" component in almost (or all) of your use cases.
On 8/18/2012 3:46 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:30:06 -0300, Lodorvonhal <lodorvon...@aol.com>
wrote:
distributed systems have a particular architecture. Web applications
can be classified according to the MVC-pattern. I know how that looks
in Tapestry.
Tapestry implements MVC: pages and components classes are the C, V are
their templates and M depends on the component (BeanModel for Grid,
BeanEditor, BeanDisplay, GridDataSource for Grid, SelectModel for
Select and Palette, etc).
If you're talking abouth 3 layer architecture, Tapestry (the web
framework, also called tapestry-core) is in the view layer, while
Tapestry-IoC can be used in the other layers too.
my professor wants a classification by fat-clint or fat-server. The
structure of an application.
The structure of the application is the structure of the application,
not of Tapestry. Tapestry(-core) isn't a full stack framework, just a
web framework so the structure of the application itself isn't
affected by the use of Tapestry.
Tapestry is a framework that does most of its logic server-side, but
does provide some client-side processing too (input validation
out-of-the-box plus anything you write in JavaScript which is used by
pages and components).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
