I heard the name of Tapestry. After using a number of web frames, I finally had a chance to try. Feel as follows:
1. Ensure the pureness of HTML, in the case of minimum interference, only a small number of JWCID properties can be added. This makes it possible to develop the development of the entire dynamic web page for agile development (the effect of the web page can change at any time without affecting the background). You can use the familiar tools to develop HTML content, like FrontPage, etc. The page section does not contain code, no additional tools such as JSP editors. The code can be done directly using the familiar tools.
2. Component-based development model is similar to the development of the organizational components in the future, which is similar to page development, which reduces the difficulty of new component development.
3. Bind
The value of the component can be binded to the page class (PAGE) class.
problem:
1. Integration with JSP
Because Tapestry is a servlet rather than JSP-based page frames, it is a problem with JSP integration, but it's like a TAG that provides JSP. I don't know what it is. I have time.
a bit.
But this general is not a problem, because after TapeStry, JSP has become not necessary.
2.ognl language
The new JSP expression language and JSF's expression language will make better integration to become an expression language. I don't know if TapeStry is likely to change its OGNL language to use it.
. In general, Tapestry gives a new feeling. If it is imitating the ASP from JSP, and ASP is an angle of imitation PHP code embedding page (of course, the code embedding page is of course
CGI mode is good, because after all, the Web is still based on content), then TapeStry is a thorough way to separate the pages and code separation after the problem of this approach, from
To some extent, it can be said to be between CGI and JSP. I remember that I have added a page component generating mechanism similar to the Tapestry mode in JSF, and I have the influence of TapeStry mode, and also explain it.
TapeStry should be JSP, so it should be compared to JSP when comparing. But TapeStry and JSF I think it is different at this point. Also use the components mechanism, Tapestry seems to be more tightly combined with the page content, and JSF seems to have wanted to group
The part is separated, and of course TapeStry is also separated by the generation of components and final drawings, but at least I feel is TapeStry more close.
