Discussions

News: JWic web application development framework v3.0.3 released

  1. jWic is a java-based development framework for developing dynamic web applications with the convenience and familiarity of 'rich client' style programming. The component-based, event-driven programming model makes it easy for developers to quickly create flexible and robust web applications. The collection of standard jWic controls has built-in Ajax functionality to enhance the end-user experience. Developers can also implement their own jWic controls and combine and incorporate them into their web applications. jWic integrates open-source standard tools like Velocity and Spring Framework so there are no proprietary scripts or languages to learn. With low configuration overhead and a separation of layout and code, developers can concentrate on implementing functionality while designers can take care of the look and feel. The Extended Control Library (ecolib) subproject contains advanced controls that complement the jWic base controls and will be a focus of future developments. The JWic Web Application Platform (WAP) subproject provides a plugin-oriented platform to facilitate easy development of rich web client applications. The architecture is aligned to the Eclipse Rich Client Platform (RCP) and provides an Extension/Extension Point mechanism for extensibility and a set of standard widget controls. The WAP project will also be a focus of future developments. Editor's note: JWic is much like Wicket in terms of application programming, in the beginning, if you're looking for a reference point.

    Threaded Messages (24)

  2. Filter for Java Web Frameworks[ Go to top ]

    It would be cool if theserverside created a filter feature so I could filter out the web framework of the week.
  3. Re: Filter for Java Web Frameworks[ Go to top ]

    +2
  4. It would be cool if theserverside created a filter feature so I could filter out the web framework of the week.
    So the definitive web framework has already been created? Where? Please provide a link? (I hope you don't mean something like Struts, Spring or RoR).
  5. [] Wow ! Thanks for releasing another Java Web application development framework. The 31,918 frameworks currently available don't offer enough choice. You know, I was just saying to my friend the other day that we really do not have enough Java web development frameworks. "Why," I said to him, "it's been three days since I read about a new web development framework on TSS ! Is the pace of innovation slowing in the Java world ? Are we that far along the road to obsolescence ? Can death be far away ?" But now I feel better. When I read about how "the architecture is aligned 'to' [sic] the Eclipse Rich Client Platform (RCP) and provides an Extension/Extension Point mechanism", I knew that we were talking Bidness ... and when I saw the AJAX word I knew that the richness and agileness of the end-user experience would be exceeded only by the usability, scaleability, and, most important of all, testability of applications produced by the [] . You are some wild and crazy guys, and I, for one, am going to nominate [] for the Web Application Development Framework of the Week. No, I'm serious ! You've earned it ! Stand up and take a bow ! But, yeah, next week we'll have another one. []
    And much like just about any of these frameworks, now that you mention it.
  6. The funny thing about your comment is, that I often thought simmilar when I've read about a 'new web framework' here on TSS. I thought "OMG, not another one!". But as I am one of the authors of jWic, I've taken a close look upon the "framework of the week" (FoW) to find out if its probably the same as we do, if its maybe better and if it would be worth using this FoW for our further projects instead of jWic. The result of my evaluations (until now) is that the differences between the frameworks on the market are bigger then it seems the first moment. There are a lot of different architectures, pro's and con's and different "styles". And so is jWic not just a copy of FoW XYZ, it is unique as are the others. Maybe we would not have developed jWic if so many web-frameworks would have existed the time we started (which was 3 years ago). But now it is exactly as we wanted it to be and we see no reason not to share it with the community (and tell the community about it). Florian Lippisch
  7. Florian, Congratulation on your release. I agree with you in the points you make. I heard the same objections when I release The XX Framework several months ago. I also have been developing my framework for several years and maybe I wouldn't have gone so far or have taken a diffent direction if other frameworks were available at the time. I did realize one day that there were lots of web frameworks around, some very popular, and maybe I should take a look at them. And when I did, I still found mine to be just what I wanted. If we all stopped searching once we had Struts, the next Ruby-on Rails (or Tapestry, JSF...) may never some along. In that case, I'd rather just stick with .net. Gotta love open source. Keep coding. David Moskowtiz
  8. I like to have variety to choose. If wine like you, what do you prefer, to have 100 wine types or to have 1000? I prefer to have 10000 If books like you, what do you prefer, to have 100, or to have 1000? I prefer to have 10000 I like to have variety of frameworks to choose. Time ago we (the Java programmers) could choose a variety of persistence frameworks (JDO implementations, EJB2 CMP, iBatis, Apache OJB, Castor, Hibernate, etc). Now, the only possible choice is Hibernate (exaggeration, or not?). I don't know if the existence of an definitive standard de facto (as hiberntate) is good or bad, but at least WATCHING the process is INTERESTING, and maybe Hibernate (or JPA) has ideas and influence of other ORM frameworks now in a moribund state. Nowaday seems that the RIA is an inevitable way. Currently, there isn't a de facto standard for RIA. I'm personally interesed in RIA, and in looking at all new frameworks about AJAX, FLEX, RIA (including JWic). I don't like a 'framework' filter in TheServerSide. I don't like any filter in TheServerSide. But, if you like CocaCola, and always drink it, don't ask for a wine list; that is, simply, don't click in TheServerSide news with the word 'framework' and your mind will be free. Cheers Javier Paniza
  9. not bad[ Go to top ]

    So we have another webframework and another rant about it. I took a peek and it looks indeed like Wicket, meaning that components are defined in Java and have a layout defined in a separate file. JWic uses velocity as the layout engine. So if Wicket is interesting, then so is JWic. My compliments to the developers. On the other hand: if JWic and Wicket are similar, maybe the developers can explain the differences for us. Because the rant also has a point: can't see the forest from the trees, is the saying? Hell, I even got my own framework laying around, including direct binding to the business model, automatic validation, and the smuck, but I would not dare putting it out there. Personally I have no idea which framework to use if I were to start a new web application. JSF because it's a standard? WW2 because it comes from Struts? Or something on top of a RoR clone, like Trails or Grails? Wicket, Tapestry, JWic. MOMMY!!!!!
  10. Re: not bad[ Go to top ]

    I would be happy if all the frameworks state on the very first page the following: 1. I(we) had a need to do: 2. I(we) have tried the following frameworks: before starting to develop my own 3. They are supposed to address my needs but I was not happy with them because: 4. I(we) decided not to contribute to any of the existing open source frameworks because: http://kgionline.com/annoying/openSrc.jsp
  11. Hi Konstantin, I disagree with your list, because: It's a logic way for thinking, and unfortunately (or fortunately?) the engine that powers our minds does not work (mainly) using logic inferences... What about competition ? What about imitation ? Are these thing so bad ? If the all people follow your list we will have only a open source implementation of JPA, only a Java application server, only a cola drink... A great world! Cheers Javier P.D.: Don't worry about frameworks abundance. In 1999 there was more than 30 J2EE application servers, and now only four or five really matter.
  12. In 1999 there was more than 30 J2EE application servers, and now only four or five really matter.
  13. In 1999 there was more than 30 J2EE application servers, and now only four or five really matter.
    Very good point. Evolution runs it's course.
  14. Hi Konstantin,

    I disagree with your list, because:

    It's a logic way for thinking, and unfortunately (or fortunately?) the engine that powers our minds does not work (mainly) using logic inferences...
    Perhaps you misunderstand my list: it is not against multiple frameworks, it is about honest explanation of reasons no matter how silly they might be for someone. The list should help people to evaluate projects and decide if they want to join or use. Reasons examples: - I think that project lead is a jerk; - Configuration should not be XML based; - Different paradigm should be used to address this problem area; - Whatever.. Just spell this things out please. If filling my template hurts - GOOD! - you just got reality check and lesson of being humble and respectful to other people's work. If filling the template is easy - GREAT! - now we have something to look at.
  15. Hi Konstantin,

    I disagree with your list, because:

    It's a logic way for thinking, and unfortunately (or fortunately?) the engine that powers our minds does not work (mainly) using logic inferences...


    Perhaps you misunderstand my list: it is not against multiple frameworks, it is about honest explanation of reasons no matter how silly they might be for someone. The list should help people to evaluate projects and decide if they want to join or use.
    Reasons examples:
    - I think that project lead is a jerk;
    - Configuration should not be XML based;
    - Different paradigm should be used to address this problem area;
    - Whatever..

    Just spell this things out please.

    If filling my template hurts - GOOD! - you just got reality check and lesson of being humble and respectful to other people's work. If filling the template is easy - GREAT! - now we have something to look at.
    - This one is it! They TRULY separated presentation from business logic! Perfectly! - Konstantin is asking for CONTEXT. maybe even Historical Perspective. Like: CGI (whee! Perl and the Web! What could go wrong?) -> Servlets (look ma, no process respawns) -> JSP (but I *liked* unreadable reams of out.printlns) -> Struts (scriptlets... I do NOT miss thee) -> JSF (Swing is so fun to code, let's use it for webapps, except make it HARDER) AJAX + services + stateless web tier is my new hope: the view IS the controller.
  16. documentation/examples[ Go to top ]

    I would venture to guess that most new java web frameworks are developed because of a lack of documentation and examples for the existing web frameworks. i.e. "I can't get framework X to do EXACTLY this ___ -- I guess I'll have to write my own" I understand the frustration but it is not solved by developing a new framework that lacks good documentation and examples. OTOH, I agree with the comments regarding innovation -- I just wish it could be consolidated somehow. The best web framework features are distributed across a dozen different incompatible solutions.
  17. Hello Konstantin, I will try to answer your questions. Please keep in mind that development started 3 years ago. 1) We had a need to do: - Implement web applications with a rich UI that behaved much more like a rich client then a typical web client. - Since customer requirements changed often(lets not discuss about project managemnet here), we had to refactor/change the application often. 2) We have tried the following frameworks: Model 2 JSP/Servlet architectures, Spring Web-MVC (later) and some others 3) We were not happy with them because: - This list is quit long, but as a summary I would say that we simply wanted to concentrate upon our "Business Problems" and not technical issues like parameter extraction from URLs, session/state management, configuration overkill and such stuff. Working with jWic is a pleasure, which we did not have had with frameworks we used before. 4) We decided not to contribute to any of the existing open source frameworks because: No framework existed that had the features/functionality that we wanted. After all you can say that we developed jWic because we had the need in our projects and did not found something equivalent. But I think that this answer fits on 99% of the existing frameworks, so I dont know if it helps ya :-). - Florian Lippisch
  18. Hello Konstantin,

    I will try to answer your questions.
    Thanks
    Please keep in mind that development started 3 years ago .....
    2) We have tried the following frameworks: Model 2 JSP/Servlet architectures, Spring Web-MVC (later) and some others
    Sorry if that hurts but this is how I read your answers Florian: - it looks like they did not look at frameworks which truly might work for their requirements (RIA like webapps apps). 3-4 years ago there were Echo from Nextapp ans wingS. Tapestry was around too. Strange... - Later comparison with Spring-MVC looks like biased choice framework (MVC) to justify continous development of jWic (component and event oriented).
    and not technical issues like parameter extraction from URLs
    gee, did they hear about request.getParameter() ? What they are talking about? C'mon Florian, you can do better than that :)
  19. Sorry Konstantin, but I get the feeling that all you want to do with your few questions is to criticise, regardless the answers. But maybe I have the wrong impression, so let me further explain what I meant. The time we started, JSP/Servlets where state-of-the-art and a lot of "experts" proclaimed that this is the only way. But obviously, we where not the only ones that where not satisfied with these solutions. The development of the mentioned component and event oriented frameworks started all around this time. Its hard to say who was the first one, but they all where small projects with no big attention at first. When some of those frameworks became popular, we for sure had a look at them. But we found out that their approaches where quit differnt to ours. We simply believe that our concept is better. Thats why we did not stoped in the middle of development and hit the delete button. However, todays situation is that there are several frameworks available that are based on the same idea. But as I mentioned before, they are more different then it seems. Each one has its pro's and con's, but in the end it will be up to the user which approach they prefer for their project. Now your next question:
    gee, did they hear about request.getParameter() ?
    What they are talking about?

    C'mon Florian, you can do better than that :)
    Look at this code, wich is probably in a Servlet: if(request.getParameter("source").equals("foo")) { int start = Integer.parseInt(request.getParameter("start")); ... The servlet is mapped to a URL that is generated in a JSP file like this: Next It is a common way to hard-wire arguments within templates, which is a bad. Refactoring is very hard and its just boring to work with request.getParameter(). I prefer working with objects that have events and properties like this: nextButton.addSelectionListener(new SelectionListener() { public void elementSelected(SelectionEvent event) { listModel.nextPage(); } } I hope this answers your questions. If you are interested in learning more about jWic, I will be glad to help you to get into it and I will answer all your questions regarding jWic's approach and architecture. Simply post on the mailing list or send a mail to florian.lippisch at pol-it.de. - Florian Lippisch
  20. After I've hit preview, TSS converted my &gt;'s into > :-(. The code from the JSP file looked like this: <A href="list.jsp?source=foo&<%= start + 10 %>">Next</A>
  21. Sorry Konstantin, but I get the feeling that all you want to do with your few questions is to criticise, regardless the answers. But maybe I have the wrong impression...
    Yes, the impression is wrong. The purpose of my questions/template is to help me and others quickly understand what is this all about. Since developers in general have certain previous knowledge of frameworks and design patters I think that it makes sense for all projects to reference similar ones. You have mentioned that at some point you have evaluated other popular solutions and discovered that they are not that similar as it might seem for a casual observer. That kind of information is what is the most valuable because there is too much of commonalities between all the projects targeting the same problem area. So, please take a time and try to create page that answer my questions not for me only but for all potential visitors and evaluators of your framework. Please look at the following page as examples of explanations created in the spirit of my questionnaire: http://howardlewisship.com/blog/2004/06/hivemind-vs-spring-philosophy.html
  22. Such a comparision will be written sooner or later, but it will take a little while. Maybe you will see another post here on TSS once such a document has been created. As this news goes of the main screen now, I say thanx to everyone for your comments and your time.
  23. Similar to Wicket?[ Go to top ]

    Not really/ really not. Take a look at a few basic examples of both frameworks to see the differences yourself.
  24. What is "no Ajax"?[ Go to top ]

    When Javascript is turned off, "Counter" demo submits the page despite that counter is not incremented. Control-Demo throws something like "HTTP Status 404 - /demo/sample/c0.window.c0.c0.c0" even in non-Ajax mode. Apparently, according to jWic, Ajax == XmlHttpRequest and browsers without Javascript do not exist.
  25. Re: What is "no Ajax"?[ Go to top ]

    Hello Michael, jWic applications require JavaScript. They can not be used on devices/browsers that do not support JavaScript, because we simply do not (want to) support them. We believe that supporting all kinds of devices would increase complexity unnecesary as the majority of RIA applications run on modern browsers that support JavaScript. no-ajax mode means, that jWic does not use the XmlHttpRequest object even if it is available. In that case, jWic submits the whole page and renderes it again on each action. jWic uses this mode when the XmlHttpRequest object is not available, but sometimes its usefull (i.e. for testing) to switch it off. I hope that answered your question. - Florian Lippisch