Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
Locked
12
12
 
|
Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not show any
clear cut direction. I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like Dojo (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see them in the API for Prototype. I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible to integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo as the primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with others. I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able to do a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is an important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman like and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would opt for Dojo. If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure where the community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if you care to. -Al |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using
Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes Javascript a usable Javascript (In my opinion). There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout Process for ecommerce implemented using Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. My vote is for Prototype.js. Regards Anil Patel Al Byers wrote: > Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not show any > clear cut direction. > > I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like Dojo > (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see them in > the API for Prototype. > > I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible to > integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be > practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo as the > primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with others. > I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have > everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able to do > a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is an > important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman like > and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would opt for > Dojo. > > If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure where the > community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if you > care to. > > -Al > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote:
> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes Javascript > a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > > There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > Process for ecommerce implemented using > Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > > My vote is for Prototype.js. JQuery, jquery, jquery! http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ ps. jquery -- Ean Schuessler, CTO [hidden email] 214-720-0700 x 315 Brainfood, Inc. http://www.brainfood.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by byersa
Al,
I had built Dojo into the Widget Engine already, in one of my own private implementations. (Beyond that, I had also done several nifty AJAX stuff in Widget Engine, like making the next/prev buttons AJAXed). The exercise has told me that integrating any other javascript toolkit into the Widget Engine will follow similar lines. I have the distinct feeling that the Widget Engine can be built to support more than 1 toolkit! Let me know which toolkit wins your votes, and I'll see if I can kick start the integration exercise. Jonathon Al Byers wrote: > Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not show any > clear cut direction. > > I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like Dojo > (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see them in > the API for Prototype. > > I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible to > integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be > practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo as the > primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with others. > I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have > everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able to do > a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is an > important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman like > and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would opt for > Dojo. > > If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure where the > community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if you > care to. > > -Al > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.14/999 - Release Date: 9/10/2007 5:43 PM |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ean Schuessler
The nice thing with Dojo is its XML structure that maps well to screen
widgets. I don't know prototype or jQuery very well but they look like more JavaScript stuff that you place in your page. If we won't to extend screen widgets could this be done easily with Prototype or jQuery? Brett On 9/11/07, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > > I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > > Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes Javascript > > a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > > > > There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > > widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > > Process for ecommerce implemented using > > Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > > > > My vote is for Prototype.js. > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > ps. jquery > > -- > Ean Schuessler, CTO > [hidden email] > 214-720-0700 x 315 > Brainfood, Inc. > http://www.brainfood.com > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ean Schuessler
I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits
such as yahoo. Thanks, Raj Ean Schuessler wrote: > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > >> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using >> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes Javascript >> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). >> >> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing >> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout >> Process for ecommerce implemented using >> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. >> >> My vote is for Prototype.js. >> > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > ps. jquery > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
Administrator
|
I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1
Jacques De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> > I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits > such as yahoo. > > Thanks, > > Raj > Ean Schuessler wrote: > > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > > > >> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > >> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes Javascript > >> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > >> > >> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > >> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > >> Process for ecommerce implemented using > >> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > >> > >> My vote is for Prototype.js. > >> > > > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > > > ps. jquery > > > > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
In reply to this post by jonwimp
Hi Jonathon,
How do you built dojo into the Widget Engine? Is there any code I can reuse? And I think Dojo it's powerfull, I like dojo to deal js as the div. Thanks, Jack Guo 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: > > Al, > > I had built Dojo into the Widget Engine already, in one of my own private > implementations. (Beyond > that, I had also done several nifty AJAX stuff in Widget Engine, like > making the next/prev buttons > AJAXed). > > The exercise has told me that integrating any other javascript toolkit > into the Widget Engine will > follow similar lines. I have the distinct feeling that the Widget Engine > can be built to support > more than 1 toolkit! > > Let me know which toolkit wins your votes, and I'll see if I can kick > start the integration exercise. > > Jonathon > > Al Byers wrote: > > Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not show > any > > clear cut direction. > > > > I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like Dojo > > (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see them > in > > the API for Prototype. > > > > I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible > to > > integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be > > practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo as > the > > primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with > others. > > I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have > > everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able > to do > > a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is an > > important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman > like > > and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would opt > for > > Dojo. > > > > If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure where > the > > community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if > you > > care to. > > > > -Al > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.14/999 - Release Date: > 9/10/2007 5:43 PM > > |
RE: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
How about EXT http://extjs.com/
I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. -----Original Message----- From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 Jacques De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> > I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits > such as yahoo. > > Thanks, > > Raj > Ean Schuessler wrote: > > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > > > >> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > >> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes > >> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > >> > >> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > >> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > >> Process for ecommerce implemented using > >> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > >> > >> My vote is for Prototype.js. > >> > > > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > > > ps. jquery > > > > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
Administrator
|
LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped !
Jacques De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> > How about EXT http://extjs.com/ > > I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever > > I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 > > Jacques > > > De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> > > I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits > > such as yahoo. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Raj > > Ean Schuessler wrote: > > > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > > > > > >> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > > >> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes > Javascript > > >> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > > >> > > >> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > > >> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > > >> Process for ecommerce implemented using > > >> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > > >> > > >> My vote is for Prototype.js. > > >> > > > > > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > > > > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > > > > > ps. jquery > > > > > > > > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by byersa
Mmm, actually it's the same for JQyery.
Dojo is Apache licence compliant (Academic Free Licence, BSD Licence). I suppose it's the main reason we can find Dojo in OFBiz... Jacques De : "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! > > Jacques > > De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> > > How about EXT http://extjs.com/ > > > > I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 > > To: [hidden email] > > Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever > > > > I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 > > > > Jacques > > > > > > De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> > > > I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits > > > such as yahoo. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Raj > > > Ean Schuessler wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > > > > > > > >> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > > > >> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes > > Javascript > > > >> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > > > >> > > > >> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > > > >> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > > > >> Process for ecommerce implemented using > > > >> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > > > >> > > > >> My vote is for Prototype.js. > > > >> > > > > > > > > JQuery, jquery, jquery! > > > > > > > > http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > > > > > > > > ps. jquery > > > > > > > > > > > > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
Can be used in OFBiz but unless the ASF policy has changed this could not be included in the OFBiz svn or distros. -David Jacques Le Roux wrote: > LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! > > Jacques > > De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> >> How about EXT http://extjs.com/ >> >> I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever >> >> I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 >> >> Jacques >> >> >> De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> >>> I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits >>> such as yahoo. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Raj >>> Ean Schuessler wrote: >>>> On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using >>>>> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes >> Javascript >>>>> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). >>>>> >>>>> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing >>>>> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout >>>>> Process for ecommerce implemented using >>>>> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. >>>>> >>>>> My vote is for Prototype.js. >>>>> >>>> JQuery, jquery, jquery! >>>> >>>> http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ >>>> >>>> ps. jquery >>>> >>>> |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
I'd say that we should consider only the toolkits that are released in a
100% compatible license... OFBiz must work properly out of the box and it would be a pain to ask users to download a separate library. Jacopo Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Mmm, actually it's the same for JQyery. > > Dojo is Apache licence compliant (Academic Free Licence, BSD Licence). > > I suppose it's the main reason we can find Dojo in OFBiz... > > Jacques > > De : "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! >> >> Jacques >> >> De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> >>> How about EXT http://extjs.com/ >>> >>> I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever >>> >>> I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> >>>> I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits >>>> such as yahoo. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Raj >>>> Ean Schuessler wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using >>>>>> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes >>> Javascript >>>>>> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). >>>>>> >>>>>> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing >>>>>> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout >>>>>> Process for ecommerce implemented using >>>>>> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. >>>>>> >>>>>> My vote is for Prototype.js. >>>>>> >>>>> JQuery, jquery, jquery! >>>>> >>>>> http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ >>>>> >>>>> ps. jquery >>>>> >>>>> |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
Administrator
|
I totally agree, we can't mortgage the future...
Jacques De : "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]> > I'd say that we should consider only the toolkits that are released in a > 100% compatible license... OFBiz must work properly out of the box and > it would be a pain to ask users to download a separate library. > > Jacopo > > > Jacques Le Roux wrote: > > Mmm, actually it's the same for JQyery. > > > > Dojo is Apache licence compliant (Academic Free Licence, BSD Licence). > > > > I suppose it's the main reason we can find Dojo in OFBiz... > > > > Jacques > > > > De : "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > >> LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! > >> > >> Jacques > >> > >> De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> > >>> How about EXT http://extjs.com/ > >>> > >>> I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 > >>> To: [hidden email] > >>> Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever > >>> > >>> I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 > >>> > >>> Jacques > >>> > >>> > >>> De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> > >>>> I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits > >>>> such as yahoo. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> > >>>> Raj > >>>> Ean Schuessler wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using > >>>>>> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes > >>> Javascript > >>>>>> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing > >>>>>> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout > >>>>>> Process for ecommerce implemented using > >>>>>> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My vote is for Prototype.js. > >>>>>> > >>>>> JQuery, jquery, jquery! > >>>>> > >>>>> http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ > >>>>> > >>>>> ps. jquery > >>>>> > >>>>> > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by guo weizhan
Hi Jack,
I integrated the AJAX aspects of Dojo into the Widget Engine. Haven't done much with the Dojo widgets. Check out the Form Widget elements like <field> and attributes like "action", the ideas are there. At the simplest level, my integration merely makes it unnecessary for you to write any javascript codes to do AJAX, that's all. There are also several extensions that have more to do with javascript than with Dojo. As we get more and more common javascript chunks showing up, we can also abstract those into the Widget Engine. Hope you understand my rough illustration of my integration strategy. No rocket science, as you can see. Rather than have me dump to you my assorted toolsets, why don't you specify on JIRA exactly what you need to get done with Dojo and Widget Engine? I'll submit small and self-contained patches to address specific needs. Cleaner that way, and easier to merge into OFBiz SVN. So is Dojo to chosen toolkit? I'd vote for it, since it already is in OFBiz SVN. Jonathon guo weizhan wrote: > Hi Jonathon, > > How do you built dojo into the Widget Engine? Is there any code I can reuse? > > And I think Dojo it's powerfull, I like dojo to deal js as the div. > > Thanks, > > Jack Guo > > > 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: >> Al, >> >> I had built Dojo into the Widget Engine already, in one of my own private >> implementations. (Beyond >> that, I had also done several nifty AJAX stuff in Widget Engine, like >> making the next/prev buttons >> AJAXed). >> >> The exercise has told me that integrating any other javascript toolkit >> into the Widget Engine will >> follow similar lines. I have the distinct feeling that the Widget Engine >> can be built to support >> more than 1 toolkit! >> >> Let me know which toolkit wins your votes, and I'll see if I can kick >> start the integration exercise. >> >> Jonathon >> >> Al Byers wrote: >>> Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not show >> any >>> clear cut direction. >>> >>> I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like Dojo >>> (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see them >> in >>> the API for Prototype. >>> >>> I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible >> to >>> integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be >>> practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo as >> the >>> primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with >> others. >>> I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have >>> everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able >> to do >>> a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is an >>> important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman >> like >>> and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would opt >> for >>> Dojo. >>> >>> If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure where >> the >>> community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if >> you >>> care to. >>> >>> -Al >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>> Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.14/999 - Release Date: >> 9/10/2007 5:43 PM >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.15/1002 - Release Date: 9/11/2007 5:46 PM |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
Hi Jonathon,
What I need is like the struts2 integrate with dojo, when you want to use the AJAX function just add " theme='ajax' " in the form elements. and then the form have the AJAX function like submit it without refresh all page, auto validation the input, make the table pages AJAXed and so on. I will create JIRA for this, and waiting for your contribute:) Thank you! Jack Guo 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: > > Hi Jack, > > I integrated the AJAX aspects of Dojo into the Widget Engine. Haven't done > much with the Dojo widgets. > > Check out the Form Widget elements like <field> and attributes like > "action", the ideas are there. > At the simplest level, my integration merely makes it unnecessary for you > to write any javascript > codes to do AJAX, that's all. > > There are also several extensions that have more to do with javascript > than with Dojo. As we get > more and more common javascript chunks showing up, we can also abstract > those into the Widget Engine. > > Hope you understand my rough illustration of my integration strategy. No > rocket science, as you > can see. > > Rather than have me dump to you my assorted toolsets, why don't you > specify on JIRA exactly what > you need to get done with Dojo and Widget Engine? I'll submit small and > self-contained patches to > address specific needs. Cleaner that way, and easier to merge into OFBiz > SVN. > > So is Dojo to chosen toolkit? I'd vote for it, since it already is in > OFBiz SVN. > > Jonathon > > guo weizhan wrote: > > Hi Jonathon, > > > > How do you built dojo into the Widget Engine? Is there any code I can > reuse? > > > > And I think Dojo it's powerfull, I like dojo to deal js as the div. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jack Guo > > > > > > 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: > >> Al, > >> > >> I had built Dojo into the Widget Engine already, in one of my own > private > >> implementations. (Beyond > >> that, I had also done several nifty AJAX stuff in Widget Engine, like > >> making the next/prev buttons > >> AJAXed). > >> > >> The exercise has told me that integrating any other javascript toolkit > >> into the Widget Engine will > >> follow similar lines. I have the distinct feeling that the Widget > Engine > >> can be built to support > >> more than 1 toolkit! > >> > >> Let me know which toolkit wins your votes, and I'll see if I can kick > >> start the integration exercise. > >> > >> Jonathon > >> > >> Al Byers wrote: > >>> Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not > show > >> any > >>> clear cut direction. > >>> > >>> I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like > Dojo > >>> (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see > them > >> in > >>> the API for Prototype. > >>> > >>> I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be possible > >> to > >>> integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't be > >>> practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with Dojo > as > >> the > >>> primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with > >> others. > >>> I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have > >>> everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am able > >> to do > >>> a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that is > an > >>> important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman > >> like > >>> and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would > opt > >> for > >>> Dojo. > >>> > >>> If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure > where > >> the > >>> community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote if > >> you > >>> care to. > >>> > >>> -Al > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>> Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.14/999 - Release Date: > >> 9/10/2007 5:43 PM > >> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.15/1002 - Release Date: > 9/11/2007 5:46 PM > > |
Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever
|
|
In reply to this post by guo weizhan
The jira url: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1235
2007/9/12, guo weizhan <[hidden email]>: > > Hi Jonathon, > > What I need is like the struts2 integrate with dojo, when you want to use > the AJAX function just add " theme='ajax' " in the form elements. > and then the form have the AJAX function like submit it without refresh > all page, auto validation the input, make the table pages AJAXed and so on. > > I will create JIRA for this, and waiting for your contribute:) > > Thank you! > > Jack Guo > > 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: > > > > Hi Jack, > > > > I integrated the AJAX aspects of Dojo into the Widget Engine. Haven't > > done much with the Dojo widgets. > > > > Check out the Form Widget elements like <field> and attributes like > > "action", the ideas are there. > > At the simplest level, my integration merely makes it unnecessary for > > you to write any javascript > > codes to do AJAX, that's all. > > > > There are also several extensions that have more to do with javascript > > than with Dojo. As we get > > more and more common javascript chunks showing up, we can also abstract > > those into the Widget Engine. > > > > Hope you understand my rough illustration of my integration strategy. No > > rocket science, as you > > can see. > > > > Rather than have me dump to you my assorted toolsets, why don't you > > specify on JIRA exactly what > > you need to get done with Dojo and Widget Engine? I'll submit small and > > self-contained patches to > > address specific needs. Cleaner that way, and easier to merge into OFBiz > > SVN. > > > > So is Dojo to chosen toolkit? I'd vote for it, since it already is in > > OFBiz SVN. > > > > Jonathon > > > > guo weizhan wrote: > > > Hi Jonathon, > > > > > > How do you built dojo into the Widget Engine? Is there any code I can > > reuse? > > > > > > And I think Dojo it's powerfull, I like dojo to deal js as the div. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jack Guo > > > > > > > > > 2007/9/12, Jonathon -- Improov <[hidden email]>: > > >> Al, > > >> > > >> I had built Dojo into the Widget Engine already, in one of my own > > private > > >> implementations. (Beyond > > >> that, I had also done several nifty AJAX stuff in Widget Engine, like > > >> making the next/prev buttons > > >> AJAXed). > > >> > > >> The exercise has told me that integrating any other javascript > > toolkit > > >> into the Widget Engine will > > >> follow similar lines. I have the distinct feeling that the Widget > > Engine > > >> can be built to support > > >> more than 1 toolkit! > > >> > > >> Let me know which toolkit wins your votes, and I'll see if I can kick > > > > >> start the integration exercise. > > >> > > >> Jonathon > > >> > > >> Al Byers wrote: > > >>> Where did we leave the javascript toolkit debate? Googling does not > > show > > >> any > > >>> clear cut direction. > > >>> > > >>> I have a question about Prototype. Does it have layout widgets like > > Dojo > > >>> (eg. TabContainer, SplitContainer, AccordianContainer)? I don't see > > them > > >> in > > >>> the API for Prototype. > > >>> > > >>> I think we need to make a choice primarily because it will be > > possible > > >> to > > >>> integrate a toolkit with the screen widget technology and it won't > > be > > >>> practical to do more than one. Right now I feel comfortable with > > Dojo as > > >> the > > >>> primary js toolkit, but that could be because I am not familiar with > > >> others. > > >>> I like the strong layout widgets that Dojo has and it seems to have > > >>> everything else, too, and I don't think that is a bad thing. I am > > able > > >> to do > > >>> a file upload within Dojo and get a JSON response and I think that > > is an > > >>> important consideration. I have read that Dojo is more Java, workman > > > > >> like > > >>> and Prototype is more Ruby and elegant. If that is the case, I would > > opt > > >> for > > >>> Dojo. > > >>> > > >>> If nothing else, it might be useful to use this thread to measure > > where > > >> the > > >>> community's interest lies. So respond with nothing more than a vote > > if > > >> you > > >>> care to. > > >>> > > >>> -Al > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >>> > > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > >>> Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.14/999 - Release Date: > > >> 9/10/2007 5:43 PM > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.15/1002 - Release Date: > > 9/11/2007 5:46 PM > > > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
JQuery is also available under MIT license. Is it compatible with Apache
license? http://docs.jquery.com/Licensing Thanks, Raj Jacques Le Roux wrote: > LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! > > Jacques > > De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> > >> How about EXT http://extjs.com/ >> >> I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever >> >> I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 >> >> Jacques >> >> >> De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> >> >>> I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits >>> such as yahoo. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Raj >>> Ean Schuessler wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using >>>>> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes >>>>> >> Javascript >> >>>>> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). >>>>> >>>>> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing >>>>> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout >>>>> Process for ecommerce implemented using >>>>> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. >>>>> >>>>> My vote is for Prototype.js. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> JQuery, jquery, jquery! >>>> >>>> http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ >>>> >>>> ps. jquery >>>> >>>> >>>> > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by byersa
This is strange. It is only possible (methinks) if John Resig has copyright ownership of every part of JQuery. And if he does, then the MIT license invalidates the GPL license. If he does not have copyright ownership of every part of JQuery, then if any contributions were added through the GPL license, it's likely all of the codebase is GPL.
----- Original Message ---- From: Raj Saini <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:11:16 AM Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever JQuery is also available under MIT license. Is it compatible with Apache license? http://docs.jquery.com/Licensing Thanks, Raj Jacques Le Roux wrote: > LGPL 3.0 : can be used in OFBiz but no changes to the lib are authorised. If they are issues you are trapped ! > > Jacques > > De : "Mike Wong" <[hidden email]> > >> How about EXT http://extjs.com/ >> >> I've used this to turn all the OFBiz table into a data grid. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 14:50 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: Dojo vs. Prototype vs. whatever >> >> I don't know much about JQuery, but philosophically yes +1 >> >> Jacques >> >> >> De : "Raj Saini" <[hidden email]> >> >>> I second, JQuery is lightweight and can work with other Widget toolkits >>> such as yahoo. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Raj >>> Ean Schuessler wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday 11 September 2007 07:10:49 pm Anil K Patel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I have worked little bit in Dojo and then was forced into using >>>>> Prototypejs. I found Prototype lot easy to use. It just makes >>>>> >> Javascript >> >>>>> a usable Javascript (In my opinion). >>>>> >>>>> There are few libraries that build on top of Prototype for providing >>>>> widgets. We have used them and found really easy. I have a new Checkout >>>>> Process for ecommerce implemented using >>>>> Prototype/Validation.js/scriptaculous. I share it soon. >>>>> >>>>> My vote is for Prototype.js. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> JQuery, jquery, jquery! >>>> >>>> http://jquery.com/blog/2006/08/20/why-jquerys-philosophy-is-better/ >>>> >>>> ps. jquery >>>> >>>> >>>> > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |