[Dojo-interest] Marshalling support
jcarreira at gmail.com
Sat May 14 10:25:38 PDT 2005
Well, not necessarily rolling their own backends... On the Java side there
are several of us from the WebWork team who are on this list and putting as
much time as we can toward integrating Dojo into the next-gen of WebWork.
We're hoping to make it where our users can be using Dojo without having to
know too much about it :-)
On 5/14/05, Tim Mansfield <manzoid at gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh okay, we're totally on the same page. Those Flickr "API Kits" I
> pointed to earlier by way of example are "unsupported 3rd party"
> things that are expressly not part of their core API, not part of
> their supported codebase.
> So we're talking about the same thing -- code examples outside of Dojo
> itself, but prominently offered in the Dojo demo/tutorial gallery to
> help people get up and running fast against their favorite backend
> When we get to the appropriate stage, hopefully in the near term, I'd
> be happy to pitch in with some JSP / java servlet samples for that
> gallery. Actually, it should be fairly easy to collect some decent
> such samples since anyone who wants to try out Dojo non-trivially will
> of necessity be rolling their own backends. The (non-proprietary)
> cream of this effort by early Dojo adopters could be code-reviewed and
> packaged for the Dojo sample gallery.
> On 5/13/05, Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't quite understand the pure client-side emphasis that you seem
> > > to be implying. The main point of Dojo is an *application* framework,
> > > not just a widget collection or similar loose bag of tricks. Web
> > > applications of any serious scale will need to communicate
> > > non-trivially with the backend to be useful. Demonstrating various
> > > common client-server patterns implemented btw Dojo and the common
> > > webapp server technologies seems like a no-brainer for Dojo
> > > evangelism.
> > It most certainly is. But the server tech apis should not be a core
> > part of Dojo--it should be add-ons or implementations working with
> > Dojo. That's what I meant by it. There's nothing worse than to take
> > a kit that it intended for a specific purpose (in this case, a
> > client-side library) and (unintentionally perhaps) force a particular
> > server platform to go with it. The whole point of SOAP, XML-RPC and
> > something like JSON is to provide a platform-agnostic way of passing
> > structures back and forth. In my mind at least, Dojo (and any other
> > successful js api, btw) should remain completely self-sufficient and
> > not rely on any specific server technologies.
> > That being said, I don't see anything at all wrong with creating
> > add-ons that are not a part of the Dojo core distribution. Including
> > Flickr and perhaps a Google Map API :)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dojo-interest mailing list
> > Dojo-interest at dojotoolkit.org
> > http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
> Dojo-interest mailing list
> Dojo-interest at dojotoolkit.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Dojo-interest