Re: Birds of a Feather: but what Feather?

Wicket has also caught my attention. From the outside it appears easy to
use, and looks like it leverages the developer's strengths instead of
working against them.

I am an advocate of REST style [1], which basically means placing
application-level state in hypertext (markup and URIs) instead of in a
Session object. That, combined with proper use of HTTP verbs (GET, POST,
etc.), can make a web app far more scalable (because it is easier to cache,
load-balance, etc.). Also, because it stresses a uniform interface with
predictable semantics, it tends to make the web app easier to interact with
from a programmatic (web service) perspecive.

Historically, the component-oriented framework camps (JSF, Tapestry, Wicket,
et. al) collided heavily with REST style by using the Servlet API's Session
object heavily, misusing HTTP verbs, etc. A lot of those people are just now
starting to understand why REST is so important. Some others, notably the
Ruby on Rails devs, already "get it" and are reworking their frameworks
around REST.

I would love to hear more about how Wicket handles REST. (Likewise for other
frameworks).

--Jeoff
(New to the group; moved to triangle area in September).


On 11/30/06, Phillip Rhodes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Robert J. Cameron wrote:
> > How about web development frameworks? Struts, Spring, JSF, Tapestry
> > etc.
> >
> That is a topic that never seems to get old! :-)
>
> On that note, I've just been experimenting with Wicket recently. I've
> written up some
> stuff about it on my blog at
> <http://jroller.com/page/mindcrime?entry=really_impressed_with_wicket>.
>
> If one of the BoF tables winds up revolving around this topic, I'd be
> happy to
> talk about Wicket a bit... I can bring my laptop and do some "show n'
> tell"
> on Wicket if anybody's interested.
>
> So what do we have so far? Four topics mentioned?  Web Development
> Frameworks, Semantic Web,
> Social Networking, Portals?  Anybody want to register interest in being
> part of a BoF group
> discussing any of these things?  Or propose something else?
>
> I ask, because it seems like it would be nice if people could have some
> idea of what the
> topics might be in advance... so they can prepare questions, or do some
> advance
> research on a topic or whatever.  Or just make a decision whether to
> attend or not. :-)
>
>
> TTYL,
>
>
> Phil
>
> _______________________________________________
> Juglist mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org
>

_______________________________________________
Juglist mailing list
[email protected]
http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org