OFBiz › OFBiz - User

ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

18 messages Options

Walter Vaughan

ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache 2.0 license.
I know that Si and a few others are working on integrating a few ajax features
into the project, but it might be cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the
Google(r) Web Toolkit(tm)"...

http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html

--
Walter

Tim Ruppert

Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
direction to take the project.

We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.

Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6594

On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:

> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
> (tm)"...
>
> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
>
> --
> Walter

Sayoke Shome

RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

I have implemented Ajax in my Ofbiz project and found out that there is
nothing that stops us to use Ajax in the existing framework. Only
problem I faced is on using session. Since I was using Ajax to
dynamically update price (in a multi page product selection journey) on
selection of products and its config options it was utterly important to
tap onto current session and access the ConfigWrapper object. Used in
product application of Ofbiz. The problem was XmlHttpRequest was
creating a different session for it and was unable to tap on existing
session and thereby ConfigWrapper object.

It will be great if Si and others, who are working on attaching some
Ajax features in Ofbiz, have a look in it and provide a decisive
solution.

Thanks and regards,

Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA |

"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without
integrity is dangerous and dreadful."

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Vaughan [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 7:10 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache 2.0
license.

I know that Si and a few others are working on integrating a few ajax
features

into the project, but it might be cool to have a bulletpoint like
"features the

Google(r) Web Toolkit(tm)"...

http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html

--

Walter

============================================================================================================================

Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.

Disclaimer:

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> internally within Tech Mahindra.

============================================================================================================================

Sayoke Shome

RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if Ofbiz
community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then Might
I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with its own
servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
would make Ajax implementation child's play.

But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit the
MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet will be
required.

Thanks and regards,

Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |

"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without
integrity is dangerous and dreadful."

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on

on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out

there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what

direction to take the project.

We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I

know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so

I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.

Cheers,

Tim

--

Tim Ruppert

HotWax Media

http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594

f:801.649.6594

On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:

> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache

> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on

> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be

> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit

> (tm)"...

>

> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html

>

> --

> Walter

============================================================================================================================

Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.

Disclaimer:

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> internally within Tech Mahindra.

============================================================================================================================

Cameron Smith-6

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same dual licensing framework as MySQL.

Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to this kind of model are:
1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately, after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens, forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java, there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's existing Java knowledge.

2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs, which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.

3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you are careful about it).

4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic, and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.

In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets, listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and secure.

There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.

In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)

The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also investigated, is:
http://www.openlaszlo.org/

A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon" but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a consistent approach to everything.

Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed of how it goes.

cameron

P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the community

----- Original Message ----
From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if Ofbiz
community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then Might
I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with its own
servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
would make Ajax implementation child's play.

But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit the
MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet will be
required.

Thanks and regards,

Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |

"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without
integrity is dangerous and dreadful."

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on

on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out

there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what

direction to take the project.

We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I

know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so

I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.

Cheers,

Tim

--

Tim Ruppert

HotWax Media

http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594

f:801.649.6594

On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:

> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache

> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on

> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be

> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit

> (tm)"...

>

> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html

>

> --

> Walter

============================================================================================================================

Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.

Disclaimer:

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a> internally within Tech Mahindra.

============================================================================================================================

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

David E Jones-2

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.

-David

On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:

> Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
> direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
> dual licensing framework as MySQL.
>
> Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
> basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
> "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
> this kind of model are:
> 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
> projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
> example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
> that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
> your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
> understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
> fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
> (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
> after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
> rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
> forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
> In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
> beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
> there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
> existing Java knowledge.
>
> 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
> which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
>
> 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
> are careful about it).
>
> 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
> and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
> etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
>
> In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
> listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
> are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
> secure.
>
> There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
> OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
> say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
> some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
>
> In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
> of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
> long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
>
> The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
> investigated, is:
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/
>
> A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
> stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
> plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
> based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
> but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
> other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
> that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
> configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
> these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
> consistent approach to everything.
>
> Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
> to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
> of how it goes.
>
> cameron
>
> P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
> merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
> community
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
> Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>
>
> I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
> Ofbiz
> community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
> Might
> I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
> its own
> servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
> would make Ajax implementation child's play.
>
> But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
> make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
> the
> MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
> will be
> required.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
>
>
> Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
> salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
>
> "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
> without
> integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
>
>
>
> Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
>
> on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
>
> there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
>
> direction to take the project.
>
>
>
> We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
>
> know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
>
> I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim
>
> --
>
> Tim Ruppert
>
> HotWax Media
>
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
>
>
> o:801.649.6594
>
> f:801.649.6594
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
>
>
>
>> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
>
>> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
>
>> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
>
>> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
>
>> (tm)"...
>
>>
>
>> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
>
>>
>
>> --
>
>> Walter
>
>
>
>
>
> ======================================================================
> ======================================================
>
> Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
>
> Disclaimer:
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
> you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
> Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
> Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> internally within Tech Mahindra.
>
> ======================================================================
> ======================================================
>
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> uk.messenger.yahoo.com

oceatoon

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Hi guys

have you taken a look at echo 2 Next app, It's quite impressive and all
Java just like ZK.
http://www.nextapp.com/platform/echo2/echo/

best Regards
Tibor

On 12/13/06, David E Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
> licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
> relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
>
> > Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
> > direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
> > dual licensing framework as MySQL.
> >
> > Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
> > basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
> > "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
> > this kind of model are:
> > 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
> > projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
> > example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
> > that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
> > your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
> > understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
> > fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
> > (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
> > after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
> > rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
> > forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
> > In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
> > beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
> > there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
> > existing Java knowledge.
> >
> > 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
> > which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
> >
> > 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
> > are careful about it).
> >
> > 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
> > and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
> > etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
> >
> > In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
> > listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
> > are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
> > secure.
> >
> > There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
> > OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
> > say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
> > some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
> >
> > In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
> > of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
> > long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
> >
> > The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
> > investigated, is:
> > http://www.openlaszlo.org/
> >
> > A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
> > stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
> > plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
> > based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
> > but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
> > other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
> > that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
> > configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
> > these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
> > consistent approach to everything.
> >
> > Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
> > to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
> > of how it goes.
> >
> > cameron
> >
> > P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
> > merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
> > community
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
> > Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
> >
> >
> > I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
> > Ofbiz
> > community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
> > Might
> > I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
> > its own
> > servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
> > would make Ajax implementation child's play.
> >
> > But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
> > make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
> > the
> > MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
> > will be
> > required.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
> > salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
> >
> > "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
> > without
> > integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
> >
> >
> >
> > Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
> >
> > on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
> >
> > there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
> >
> > direction to take the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
> >
> > know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
> >
> > I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > --
> >
> > Tim Ruppert
> >
> > HotWax Media
> >
> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
> >
> >
> >
> > o:801.649.6594
> >
> > f:801.649.6594
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
> >
> >> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
> >
> >> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
> >
> >> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
> >
> >> (tm)"...
> >
> >>
> >
> >> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
> >
> >>
> >
> >> --
> >
> >> Walter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> > Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
> >
> > Disclaimer:
> >
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> > and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
> > you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > internally within Tech Mahindra.
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> > Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> > uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>

Cameron Smith-6

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

Good point. I just rechecked - it is definitely GPL. I would not in fact propose including it in OFBiz, because for many many purposes OFBiz "as is" is perfectly fine and internally consistent.

I believe there would be no problem putting "OFBiz + ZK Howto" documents on the OFBiz Wiki, however?

If, which is fairly likely, we did get to the point of having some generic integration/helper code to contribute back to the community, I believe we could create a separated GPL'd codebase in sourceforge for instance, just for this "plugin", and point at it from the Wiki, with clear warnings that people should understand the different licensing model. Just as OpenTAPS financials is built as a "drop in" to OFBiz proper.

cameron

----- Original Message ----
From: David E Jones <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:32:15 PM
Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.

-David

On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

David E Jones-2

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Yes, these are both fine.

-David

On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:53 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:

> Good point. I just rechecked - it is definitely GPL. I would not
> in fact propose including it in OFBiz, because for many many
> purposes OFBiz "as is" is perfectly fine and internally consistent.
>
> I believe there would be no problem putting "OFBiz + ZK Howto"
> documents on the OFBiz Wiki, however?
>
> If, which is fairly likely, we did get to the point of having some
> generic integration/helper code to contribute back to the
> community, I believe we could create a separated GPL'd codebase in
> sourceforge for instance, just for this "plugin", and point at it
> from the Wiki, with clear warnings that people should understand
> the different licensing model. Just as OpenTAPS financials is
> built as a "drop in" to OFBiz proper.
>
> cameron
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: David E Jones <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:32:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>
>
> This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
> licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
> relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
>
>> Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
>> direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
>> dual licensing framework as MySQL.
>>
>> Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
>> basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
>> "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
>> this kind of model are:
>> 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
>> projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
>> example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
>> that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
>> your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
>> understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
>> fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
>> (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
>> after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
>> rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
>> forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
>> In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
>> beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
>> there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
>> existing Java knowledge.
>>
>> 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
>> which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
>>
>> 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
>> are careful about it).
>>
>> 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
>> and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
>> etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
>>
>> In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
>> listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
>> are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
>> secure.
>>
>> There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
>> OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
>> say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
>> some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
>>
>> In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
>> of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
>> long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
>>
>> The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
>> investigated, is:
>> http://www.openlaszlo.org/
>>
>> A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
>> stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
>> plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
>> based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
>> but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
>> other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
>> that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
>> configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
>> these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
>> consistent approach to everything.
>>
>> Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
>> to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
>> of how it goes.
>>
>> cameron
>>
>> P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
>> merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
>> community
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
>> Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>>
>>
>> I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
>> Ofbiz
>> community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
>> Might
>> I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
>> its own
>> servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
>> would make Ajax implementation child's play.
>>
>> But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
>> make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
>> the
>> MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
>> will be
>> required.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL,
>> sector V,
>> salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
>>
>> "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
>> without
>> integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
>>
>>
>>
>> Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
>>
>> on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
>>
>> there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
>>
>> direction to take the project.
>>
>>
>>
>> We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
>>
>> know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
>>
>> I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> --
>>
>> Tim Ruppert
>>
>> HotWax Media
>>
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>>
>>
>> o:801.649.6594
>>
>> f:801.649.6594
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
>>
>>> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
>>
>>> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
>>
>>> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
>>
>>> (tm)"...
>>
>>>
>>
>>> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
>>
>>>
>>
>>> --
>>
>>> Walter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> =====================================================================
>> =
>> ======================================================
>>
>> Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
>>
>> Disclaimer:
>>
>> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
>> and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
>> you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
>> Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
>> externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
>> Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
>> internally within Tech Mahindra.
>>
>> =====================================================================
>> =
>> ======================================================
>>
>>
>>
>> Send instant messages to your online friends http://
>> uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Cameron Smith-6

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

Hmm, looks nice. Feels a lot rawer than ZK but that could be just a question of time. And a much more convenient licence.

I am snowed under, but I will try and blag one of my final-year students into doing a comparison of this and ZK for his project, hehe. Has anyone else used Echo2? Or its predecessor?

cameron

----- Original Message ----
From: tibor katelbach <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:38:46 PM
Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Hi guys

have you taken a look at echo 2 Next app, It's quite impressive and all
Java just like ZK.
http://www.nextapp.com/platform/echo2/echo/

best Regards
Tibor

On 12/13/06, David E Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Jacques Le Roux

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Administrator

In reply to this post by Cameron Smith-6

From: "Cameron Smith" <[hidden email]>

> Good point. I just rechecked - it is definitely GPL. I would not in fact propose including it in OFBiz, because for many many
purposes OFBiz "as is" is perfectly fine and internally consistent.
>
> I believe there would be no problem putting "OFBiz + ZK Howto" documents on the OFBiz Wiki, however?

> If, which is fairly likely, we did get to the point of having some generic integration/helper code to contribute back to the
community, I believe we could create a separated GPL'd codebase in sourceforge for instance, just for this "plugin", and point at it
from the Wiki, with clear warnings that people should understand the different licensing model. Just as OpenTAPS financials is
built as a "drop in" to OFBiz proper.
>
> cameron

IMHO it's a pretty good idea... This will ease choice for people like me who did not find time to evaluate Ajax tools.

Jacques

> ----- Original Message ----
> From: David E Jones <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:32:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>
>
> This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
> licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
> relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
>
> > Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
> > direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
> > dual licensing framework as MySQL.
> >
> > Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
> > basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
> > "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
> > this kind of model are:
> > 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
> > projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
> > example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
> > that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
> > your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
> > understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
> > fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
> > (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
> > after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
> > rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
> > forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
> > In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
> > beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
> > there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
> > existing Java knowledge.
> >
> > 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
> > which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
> >
> > 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
> > are careful about it).
> >
> > 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
> > and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
> > etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
> >
> > In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
> > listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
> > are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
> > secure.
> >
> > There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
> > OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
> > say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
> > some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
> >
> > In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
> > of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
> > long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
> >
> > The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
> > investigated, is:
> > http://www.openlaszlo.org/
> >
> > A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
> > stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
> > plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
> > based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
> > but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
> > other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
> > that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
> > configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
> > these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
> > consistent approach to everything.
> >
> > Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
> > to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
> > of how it goes.
> >
> > cameron
> >
> > P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
> > merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
> > community
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
> > Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
> >
> >
> > I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
> > Ofbiz
> > community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
> > Might
> > I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
> > its own
> > servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
> > would make Ajax implementation child's play.
> >
> > But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
> > make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
> > the
> > MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
> > will be
> > required.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
> > salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
> >
> > "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
> > without
> > integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
> >
> >
> >
> > Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
> >
> > on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
> >
> > there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
> >
> > direction to take the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
> >
> > know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
> >
> > I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > --
> >
> > Tim Ruppert
> >
> > HotWax Media
> >
> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
> >
> >
> >
> > o:801.649.6594
> >
> > f:801.649.6594
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
> >
> >> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
> >
> >> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
> >
> >> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
> >
> >> (tm)"...
> >
> >>
> >
> >> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
> >
> >>
> >
> >> --
> >
> >> Walter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> > Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
> >
> > Disclaimer:
> >
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> > and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
> > you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > internally within Tech Mahindra.
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> > Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> > uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Andrew Ballantine

RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Cameron Smith-6

Cameron,

This looks really interesting. I have always thought that the front-end of
ofbiz was rather mixed in its technologies. I had a quick look at
http://www.potix.com/ and http://www.potix.com/zkdemo/userguide/ and was
quite impressed.

Please keep us informed of your progress. I may be in a position to help in
the new year as I may have a project for ofbiz.

Kind regards,

Andrew.

-----Original Message-----
From: Cameron Smith [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: 13 December 2006 20:23
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the direction of
using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same dual licensing
framework as MySQL.

Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a basically
normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more "desktop" model of
development. The key reasons we are jumping to this kind of model are:
1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web projects
have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for example. One of the
thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is that to code entities and
business logic, you can spend most of your time thinking about the data
model, logic flow and understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the
service is fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
(although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately, after
trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still rather a
mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens, forms, FTL,
beanshell, scattered around various directories.
In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and beanshell.
Optionally, you can define complex components in Java, there are many plugin
points. So we can reuse our developer's existing Java knowledge.

2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs, which is
one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.

3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you are
careful about it).

4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic, and less
needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers etc), by both
browser and server, every time you click a wee button.

In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets, listeners
etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They are all standard
J2EE components which I know how to configure and secure.

There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all OFBiz
JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could say that about
the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always some tradeoff between
modularization and centralization.

In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version of
Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too long (see:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)

The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also investigated, is:
http://www.openlaszlo.org/

A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big stumbling
block was that it requires the browser to have Flash plugin, of a certain
version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-based. Laszlo have been saying
that DHTML support is coming "soon" but in fact they have been saying this
for a while. All of the other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have
the drawback that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax
and configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a consistent
approach to everything.

Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product to use ZK
frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed of how it goes.

cameron

P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am merely
summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the community

----- Original Message ----
From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if Ofbiz
community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then Might
I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with its own
servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
would make Ajax implementation child's play.

But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit the
MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet will be
required.

Thanks and regards,

Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |

"Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without
integrity is dangerous and dreadful."

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on

on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out

there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what

direction to take the project.

We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I

know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so

I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.

Cheers,

Tim

--

Tim Ruppert

HotWax Media

http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594

f:801.649.6594

On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:

> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache

> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on

> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be

> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit

> (tm)"...

>

> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html

>

> --

> Walter

============================================================================
================================================

Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.

Disclaimer:

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may
review at <a
href="http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.c
om/Disclaimer.html</a> externally and <a
href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.c
om/Disclaimer.html</a> internally within Tech Mahindra.

============================================================================
================================================

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

*****************************************************************
This email has been checked by the altohiway Mailcontroller Service
*****************************************************************

Andrew Ballantine

RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by David E Jones-2

David,

Yes, it is GPL.

DoJo is BSD on the other hand and sounds similar.

Kind regards,

Andrew Ballantine

-----Original Message-----
From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: 13 December 2006 21:32
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.

-David

On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
18:13

*****************************************************************
This email has been checked by the altohiway Mailcontroller Service
*****************************************************************

Jacques Le Roux

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Administrator

A good way to compare frameworks IMHO

http://dev2dev.bea.com/pub/a/2006/11/exploring-ajax.html

Jacques

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Ballantine" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 4:30 PM
Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

> David,
>
> Yes, it is GPL.
>
> DoJo is BSD on the other hand and sounds similar.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Andrew Ballantine
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: 13 December 2006 21:32
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>
>
>
> This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
> licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
> relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
>
> > Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
> > direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
> > dual licensing framework as MySQL.
> >
> > Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
> > basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
> > "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
> > this kind of model are:
> > 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
> > projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
> > example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
> > that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
> > your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
> > understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
> > fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
> > (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
> > after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
> > rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
> > forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
> > In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
> > beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
> > there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
> > existing Java knowledge.
> >
> > 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
> > which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
> >
> > 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
> > are careful about it).
> >
> > 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
> > and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
> > etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
> >
> > In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
> > listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
> > are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
> > secure.
> >
> > There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
> > OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
> > say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
> > some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
> >
> > In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
> > of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
> > long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
> >
> > The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
> > investigated, is:
> > http://www.openlaszlo.org/
> >
> > A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
> > stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
> > plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
> > based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
> > but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
> > other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
> > that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
> > configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
> > these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
> > consistent approach to everything.
> >
> > Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
> > to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
> > of how it goes.
> >
> > cameron
> >
> > P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
> > merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
> > community
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
> > Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
> >
> >
> > I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
> > Ofbiz
> > community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
> > Might
> > I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
> > its own
> > servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
> > would make Ajax implementation child's play.
> >
> > But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
> > make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
> > the
> > MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
> > will be
> > required.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
> > salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
> >
> > "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
> > without
> > integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
> >
> >
> >
> > Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
> >
> > on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
> >
> > there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
> >
> > direction to take the project.
> >
> >
> >
> > We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
> >
> > know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
> >
> > I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > --
> >
> > Tim Ruppert
> >
> > HotWax Media
> >
> > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
> >
> >
> >
> > o:801.649.6594
> >
> > f:801.649.6594
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
> >
> >> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
> >
> >> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
> >
> >> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
> >
> >> (tm)"...
> >
> >>
> >
> >> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
> >
> >>
> >
> >> --
> >
> >> Walter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> > Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
> >
> > Disclaimer:
> >
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> > and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
> > you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
> > Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > internally within Tech Mahindra.
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ======================================================
> >
> >
> >
> > Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> > uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
> 18:13
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
> 18:13
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.18/586 - Release Date: 13/12/2006
> 18:13
>
>
>
> *****************************************************************
> This email has been checked by the altohiway Mailcontroller Service
> *****************************************************************

Cameron Smith-6

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

Tibor and all. I had some time today to followup on your Nextapp suggestion and investigate it a little more thoroughly. (Unfortunately Jacques I have not yet had time to read the BEA article you recommended, but I will).

My overall conclusion was that Nextapp is definitely not ready yet, and perhaps not ever, for the objectives I stated in my previous mail. There are three main reasons for this conclusion.

1. Nextapp is focussed on Java-only creation and building of components. Very like Swing. It does not have the option which ZK (like GTK) offers, of specifying those very same runtime components in XML. Therefore if you are tweaking the appearance of your UI rapidly, you always need to be altering Java source - not a productive model in my experience, and exactly what I am trying to get away from.

2. As that beer advert used to say a while ago "its not ready yet....!". There appear to be many bugs in basic components, and I want to be fixing bugs in MY OWN software, not Nextapps. Check out these recent posts from Nextapp forums, for example:
http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3495
http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3460
http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3465

3. There does not appear to be a dedicated development team behind Echo 2, rather it is "one of the things" that a handful of clever but too-busy guys are trying to do. Potix appear to also be clever and busy but they only do ZK, and they charge for it, i.e. they have a revenue stream to apply to its maintenance. Compare this post (observe posting dates closely)
http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3350

...with these pages from Potix, to get an idea of differing rates of progress and consistency:
http://potix.com/
http://potix.com/release/rn-2.2.0.dsp

I by no means am criticising the Nextapp team or its user community, I merely believe that this framework, at the moment, isn't fit for the purpose I have in mind. OpenLaszlo continues to be a much more obvious alternative at this point - just as soon as they get their DHTML rendering support sorted!

cheers,
cameron

----- Original Message ----
From: tibor katelbach <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:38:46 PM
Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Hi guys

have you taken a look at echo 2 Next app, It's quite impressive and all
Java just like ZK.
http://www.nextapp.com/platform/echo2/echo/

best Regards
Tibor

On 12/13/06, David E Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:

___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

oceatoon

Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?

Hi
I understand your point and find ZK very powerfull and advanced. I hadn't
had the time to go into the NextApp details myself, but there demo being
quite impressive I thought you guys might have been interested to check it
out. Now I guess that candidate is out.

I read the Ajax discussion on the dev list, and I don't have much to add.
All these libs (Dojo, prototype, JQuery ) work great and offer more or less
the same functionalities. now the question is making a choice....It's
allways a problem when there's to much choice.

I'm still on the old school and use homegrown code, but have thought of
using prototype.js or Dojo.js more than once but I'm still open to be
impressed by all these libs.

One thing is sure is the span of possibiliies ajax can bring to any Web App,
and ofbiz's architecture is perfectly adapted for it's integration.

I'd like to start a wish list of use cases where ajax has it's place within
ofbiz , please add your ideas :

- dynamic Cart without reload (add, modify qty, delete)
- getCategory products without reload
- Drag and drop, Back Office Catalog, Category, and Product organising to
have a graphical visual view of a catalog something like()
- webtools Data Maintenance relations with a tool like this
http://ondras.praha12.net/sql/demo/
- Service Error Logs for synchronisation, or importing data
- make miniDetailproduct module in a category page would get info of a
product before really going to the product page
- Product search suggestion

Regards

Tibor

On 12/16/06, Cameron Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Tibor and all. I had some time today to followup on your Nextapp
> suggestion and investigate it a little more thoroughly. (Unfortunately
> Jacques I have not yet had time to read the BEA article you recommended, but
> I will).
>
> My overall conclusion was that Nextapp is definitely not ready yet, and
> perhaps not ever, for the objectives I stated in my previous mail. There
> are three main reasons for this conclusion.
>
> 1. Nextapp is focussed on Java-only creation and building of
> components. Very like Swing. It does not have the option which ZK (like
> GTK) offers, of specifying those very same runtime components in
> XML. Therefore if you are tweaking the appearance of your UI rapidly, you
> always need to be altering Java source - not a productive model in my
> experience, and exactly what I am trying to get away from.
>
> 2. As that beer advert used to say a while ago "its not ready
> yet....!". There appear to be many bugs in basic components, and I want to
> be fixing bugs in MY OWN software, not Nextapps. Check out these recent
> posts from Nextapp forums, for example:
> http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3495
> http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3460
> http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3465
>
> 3. There does not appear to be a dedicated development team behind Echo 2,
> rather it is "one of the things" that a handful of clever but too-busy guys
> are trying to do. Potix appear to also be clever and busy but they only do
> ZK, and they charge for it, i.e. they have a revenue stream to apply to
> its maintenance. Compare this post (observe posting dates closely)
> http://forum.nextapp.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3350
>
> ...with these pages from Potix, to get an idea of differing rates of
> progress and consistency:
> http://potix.com/
> http://potix.com/release/rn-2.2.0.dsp
>
> I by no means am criticising the Nextapp team or its user community, I
> merely believe that this framework, at the moment, isn't fit for the purpose
> I have in mind. OpenLaszlo continues to be a much more obvious alternative
> at this point - just as soon as they get their DHTML rendering support
> sorted!
>
> cheers,
> cameron
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: tibor katelbach <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 11:38:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
>
> Hi guys
>
> have you taken a look at echo 2 Next app, It's quite impressive and all
> Java just like ZK.
> http://www.nextapp.com/platform/echo2/echo/
>
> best Regards
> Tibor
>
>
>
> On 12/13/06, David E Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This sounds pretty cool. Just to make it clear though, if it is GPL
> > licensed we can't include it in OFBiz nor can we include code that
> > relies on it or uses it in OFBiz.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > On Dec 13, 2006, at 1:23 PM, Cameron Smith wrote:
> >
> > > Just to contribute to this discussion, we are moving in the
> > > direction of using the ZK framework (potix.com). It has the same
> > > dual licensing framework as MySQL.
> > >
> > > Note that this is a step beyond simply "using Ajax" inside a
> > > basically normally page-by-page framework. It creates a much more
> > > "desktop" model of development. The key reasons we are jumping to
> > > this kind of model are:
> > > 1. Avoids the mish-mash of technologies and syntax which most web
> > > projects have (JSP + JSTL + Struts + DHTML + Prototype) for
> > > example. One of the thins I most like about OFBiz (backend) is
> > > that to code entities and business logic, you can spend most of
> > > your time thinking about the data model, logic flow and
> > > understanding the problem domain. Actually coding the service is
> > > fairly straightforward, and doesnºt even require Java knowledge
> > > (although Java is always there if you need it). Unfortunately,
> > > after trying out the OFBiz frontend framework, we found it still
> > > rather a mish-mash, albeit better organized. Widgets, screens,
> > > forms, FTL, beanshell, scattered around various directories.
> > > In ZK, you basically code in a very consistent XML language, and
> > > beanshell. Optionally, you can define complex components in Java,
> > > there are many plugin points. So we can reuse our developer's
> > > existing Java knowledge.
> > >
> > > 2. Nicer to look at, and facilitates making more user-friendly UIs,
> > > which is one area where OFBiz still has a long way to go.
> > >
> > > 3. Facilitates reuse of components across your application (if you
> > > are careful about it).
> > >
> > > 4. MAY be more performant because there is less network traffic,
> > > and less needless reprocessing of most of the page (menus, headers
> > > etc), by both browser and server, every time you click a wee button.
> > >
> > > In technical terms, yes it requires installation of some servlets,
> > > listeners etc. in your webapp but this to me is reasonable. They
> > > are all standard J2EE components which I know how to configure and
> > > secure.
> > >
> > > There IS a case for centralizing some of these services across all
> > > OFBiz JVM, if you use ZK in multiple webapps, but then you could
> > > say that about the OFBiz control servlet as well. There is always
> > > some tradeoff between modularization and centralization.
> > >
> > > In terms of compatibility, it DOES depend on a more recent version
> > > of Beanshell but I do not believe this issue will be around too
> > > long (see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-528)
> > >
> > > The other very similar alternative to ZK, which we also
> > > investigated, is:
> > > http://www.openlaszlo.org/
> > >
> > > A very similar architecture, and very well-documented. The big
> > > stumbling block was that it requires the browser to have Flash
> > > plugin, of a certain version, etc., whereas ZK is purely DHTML-
> > > based. Laszlo have been saying that DHTML support is coming "soon"
> > > but in fact they have been saying this for a while. All of the
> > > other frameworks (DOJO, prototype, rico, etc.) have the drawback
> > > that they do one or two things, and have their very own syntax and
> > > configuration peculiarities. ZK may not be best of breed in any of
> > > these areas, but it is no slacker, and has the advantage of a
> > > consistent approach to everything.
> > >
> > > Anyway, we are currently converting a 32bit client-server product
> > > to use ZK frontend + OFBiz backend, I will keep yous all informed
> > > of how it goes.
> > >
> > > cameron
> > >
> > > P.S. I am not in any way a representative of Potix Software, I am
> > > merely summarizing the outcomes of my findings so far, with the
> > > community
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Sayoke Shome <[hidden email]>
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 13 December, 2006 6:17:53 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Ofbiz featuring Google Ajax?
> > >
> > >
> > > I haven't worked much on DOJO (found it little confusing), but if
> > > Ofbiz
> > > community is looking for a tested and free framework for Ajax then
> > > Might
> > > I suggest DWR framework. The only disadvantage is, it comes with
> > > its own
> > > servlet. This has to be incorporated in Web.xml for web-app. But it
> > > would make Ajax implementation child's play.
> > >
> > > But after working on Ajax in Ofbiz for couple of months I feel we can
> > > make the most of it if we use naked Ajax code. It will then exploit
> > > the
> > > MVC architecture of Ofbiz to fullest and no third party servlet
> > > will be
> > > required.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks and regards,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sayoke Shome | eCommerce Framework Developer | ENSIA | BIPL, sector V,
> > > salt lake | mobile 0.99031.80520 |
> > >
> > > "Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge
> > > without
> > > integrity is dangerous and dreadful."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tim Ruppert [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 9:28 AM
> > > To: [hidden email]
> > > Subject: Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Walter, there's actually a lot of discussion on this topic going on
> > >
> > > on the dev list as we speak. There are competing "standards" out
> > >
> > > there and we're all trying to come to some consensus about what
> > >
> > > direction to take the project.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We currently have demos in JSON, Google Web Toolkit and Dojo (and I
> > >
> > > know there are lots of other ones going on with other companies) - so
> > >
> > > I'm confident that we'll get to a good place.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Tim Ruppert
> > >
> > > HotWax Media
> > >
> > > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > o:801.649.6594
> > >
> > > f:801.649.6594
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache
> > >
> > >> 2.0 license. I know that Si and a few others are working on
> > >
> > >> integrating a few ajax features into the project, but it might be
> > >
> > >> cool to have a bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit
> > >
> > >> (tm)"...
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> --
> > >
> > >> Walter
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ======================================================================
> > > ======================================================
> > >
> > > Tech Mahindra, formerly Mahindra-British Telecom.
> > >
> > > Disclaimer:
> > >
> > > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> > > and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement,
> > > you may review at <a href="http://www.techmahindra.com/
> > > Disclaimer.html">http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > > externally and <a href="http://tim.techmahindra.com/
> > > Disclaimer.html">http://tim.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html</a>
> > > internally within Tech Mahindra.
> > >
> > > ======================================================================
> > > ======================================================
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://
> > > uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and
> ease of use." - PC Magazine
> http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
>

rhodebump

Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

In reply to this post by Walter Vaughan

Sorry, but since this topic is going on still...

I am actually considering a new project that will consist of ajax
components that one can use to build a ecommerce site. To do this, I
would use apache Tapestry. It's integrated with DOJO and has dozens of
cool components (some not ajax) but such as sortable pagable tables.

I have been using tapestry for 2-3 years now, before then, I was using
struts. I say the biggest thing going for tapestry is productivity. I
can produce a richer application experience than a typical MVC
application in half the time.

I also use Tapestry in my own open source application
(http://www.authsum.org)

Phillip

Demo of Tapestry/DOJO
http://opencomponentry.com:8080/tacos/app?page=dojo%2FIndex&service=page
and
http://tapestry.apache.org

Walter Vaughan wrote:

> I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache 2.0
> license. I know that Si and a few others are working on integrating a
> few ajax features into the project, but it might be cool to have a
> bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit(tm)"...
>
> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
>
> --
> Walter
>
>

oceatoon

Re: ofBiz featuring Google ajax?

Hi Phillip

Quite an interesting solution , and maybe exactly what ofbiz needs , an
interface between the framework and the ajax lib ,
giving us developpers the choice between dojo or prototype or GWT or others.

I like the idea and it looks quite functional,
but would it be a big job to port it to the Screen Widget MVC instead of
running on Tapestry ?

Regards
Tibor

On 12/16/06, Phillip Rhodes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Sorry, but since this topic is going on still...
>
> I am actually considering a new project that will consist of ajax
> components that one can use to build a ecommerce site. To do this, I
> would use apache Tapestry. It's integrated with DOJO and has dozens of
> cool components (some not ajax) but such as sortable pagable tables.
>
> I have been using tapestry for 2-3 years now, before then, I was using
> struts. I say the biggest thing going for tapestry is productivity. I
> can produce a richer application experience than a typical MVC
> application in half the time.
>
> I also use Tapestry in my own open source application
> (http://www.authsum.org)
>
> Phillip
>
> Demo of Tapestry/DOJO
> http://opencomponentry.com:8080/tacos/app?page=dojo%2FIndex&service=page
> and
> http://tapestry.apache.org
>
> Walter Vaughan wrote:
>
> > I just read in that Google Ajax has been released under the Apache 2.0
> > license. I know that Si and a few others are working on integrating a
> > few ajax features into the project, but it might be cool to have a
> > bulletpoint like "features the Google(r) Web Toolkit(tm)"...
> >
> > http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
> >
> > --
> > Walter
> >
> >
>
>
>
>