Any tapestry aficionados around?

Hi all,

I was just wondering if there are any Tapestry fans around here?
In fact, this is the best Java framework in existence today. Do you think the same too?

Best regards,
Francis

Hi Francis,

May I know the reasons why you think Tapestry is the best framework.

Originally posted by Francis Amanfo:
Hi all,

I was just wondering if there are any Tapestry fans around here?
In fact, this is the best Java framework in existence today. Do you think the same too?

Best regards,
Francis

Originally posted by sunitha raghu:
Hi Francis,

May I know the reasons why you think Tapestry is the best framework.

Hi Sunitha,

I'll mention a few major reasons why I think Tapestry is the best Web framework.

- There is a clean separation of roles; presentation from logic. Unlike Struts where this separation is not a very clean cut (thereby enabling some users to code their business logic in controllers) , Tapestry has done this very elegantly.

-Everything is an object. Even links and http queries are associated to first class Java objects. This eases development. Moreover, code reuse and maintainability are highly enhanced.

-A great built-in exception reporting. You're told on which line exactly your error is hiding. This makes debugging painless.

-You're highly productive because of ease of reuse of standard UI components that come with the framework or self developed components in earlier projects.

Sunitha, check it out and you'll see things for yourself. I've used JSP, I've used XMLC with Barracuda. I've read but not used Struts. By far, I give a big thumbs up for Tapestry. I'm not going back!

Regards,

Francis

Hi Francis,

Thanks for giving me such a great explantion.
Be frank with you now Im confused !!! struts or tapestry?

Only problem with tapestry there are not much books available in the market

JR has given a poor rating for the book Tapestry in action.check this page

Hmm. Sounds reasonable.

How would Tapestry fare against, say, Struts (without the html taglibs, of course) if the application being built would need to support multiple views (an XHTML "rich" UI for web browsers and a restricted UI in WML for mobile devices)? I.e. how focused is Tapestry for HTML based applications?

Originally posted by sunitha raghu:
Hi Francis,

Thanks for giving me such a great explantion.
Be frank with you now Im confused !!! struts or tapestry?

Only problem with tapestry there are not much books available in the market

JR has given a poor rating for the book Tapestry in action.check this page

Sunitha,

That review wasn't a correct one. I have the book myself and I disagree with most of what is in this review. Its a great book, indeed! I've enjoyed and continue to enjoy reading it. The book has a 5 star rating at Amazon, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932394117/qid=1084892021/sr=2-2/ref=sr_2_2/103-6768988-2158254
These reviews are coming from people who own the book and have used it, just like me. So check that review instead.
You may also want to check the review at http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=24897

This is what Jonathan Locke is saying in the last link above.

I have 25 years of programming experience, including working for Microsoft and Sun on Java technologies, and I've used virtually every framework and templating engine out there over the past 7 years. All of them have some fatal defect, except Tapestry. IMO, Tapestry is by far the best framework available today. And this book is the way to learn it.

Having read the first 4 chapters in one sitting, what I hear from this negative review is mostly a bunch of bitching about how the author didn't do the reviewer's homework. Yes, the examples are contrived. But they are contribed to demonstrate and develop points and to provide full coverage to all the areas of the framework (or at least what's possible in 400 pages).

I'm amazed at both how wonderful Tapestry is (even when set next to my old favorites like Velocity/Freemarker/Tea/etc... and BTW, JSP was never worth discussing even back in the 1997/8 timeframe when it emerged) and how well this book explains it. If you want a cut-and-paste book that's 1100 pages long, you'll probably want to look somewhere else. If you want something fairly concise that actually explains to the thinking developer how Tapestry works, then this is just the ticket for you.

Best regards,

Francis
[ May 18, 2004: Message edited by: Francis Amanfo ]

Originally posted by Francis Amanfo:

Sunitha,

That review wasn't a correct one. I have the book myself and I disagree with most of what is in this review. Its a great book, indeed! I've enjoyed and continue to enjoy reading it. The book has a 5 star rating at Amazon, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932394117/qid=1084892021/sr=2-2/ref=sr_2_2/103-6768988-2158254
These reviews are coming from people who own the book and have used it, just like me. So check that review instead.

[ May 18, 2004: Message edited by: Francis Amanfo ]

Francis,

You may have liked the book. But JR review does mention that the book is geared more towards expert Tapestry users. That is one of the main reasons it got less ranking. It is more of naming problem you know.

Instead of "Tapestry in Action", they could have named it "Advanced Tapestry". What do u think of the reasoning???

Originally posted by Kishore Dandu:

Francis,

You may have liked the book. But JR review does mention that the book is geared more towards expert Tapestry users. That is one of the main reasons it got less ranking. It is more of naming problem you know.

Instead of "Tapestry in Action", they could have named it "Advanced Tapestry". What do u think of the reasoning???

Kishore,

I think the book is for anyone having at least some experience with Servlets and JSP but no fore knowledge of Tapestry. The way of thinking in Tapestry is a bit different though and this highlights the so called learning curve associated with the framework. If you're able to get past that and get accustomed to that way of thinking everything would follow smooth. And this book is here to help anyone achieve just that.

Best regards,

Francis