[seam-dev] Let me know what you need for a first stab at the PDF/Mail port from Seam 2

Mon May 24 18:31:02 EDT 2010

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:

> 0
> On 24 May 2010, at 20:40, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>
> > True, though the point of Seam being front-end agnostic is a good one.
> >  Were I using Wicket for example I can't do PDF / Mail / Excel with
> > Seam unless I also use JSF, I believe this is also part of the current
> > debate, am I right?
> >
> > I'm making it a point, if it's not already, yes ;)
> >
> > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:40, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 24 May 2010, at 19:06, Gavin King wrote:
> > >
> > >> And, of course, this is why facelets is so appropriate for the task:
> > >> facelets was designed not for text rendering, but for object graph
> > >> construction. JSP and Velocity just render text.
> > >
> > > Right, and I believe that it is pretty natural to use. I've heard many
> people say they really like the simplicity/power of using facelets to
> template their email, and the consistency with writing pages for the web.
> > >
> > > What I always hear though is that people would like to use this outside
> of a web request (e.g. as part of a batch process or in an MDB). So, I
> suggest we return to this topic.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>> I just don't buy this. On the contrary, the Seam mail functionality
> is
> > >>> NOT just rendering a bit of text, which is what I tried to explain,
> > >>> but nobody seems to be "getting". The template actually builds an
> > >>> object, with to/from addresses, a subject line, headers, etc.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@
> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> I wouldn't think it would be too terrible to get it to a point where
> > >>>> the actual template engine isn't much of a concern.  Really it's how
> > >>>> do I take these Java Objects I've built up and transform them into
> > >>>> Java Mail / iText / jxl / etc am I right?
> > >
> > > Not quite sure what "these Java Objects" refers to, but with Facelets
> it can directly create the JavaMail objects or iText objects as part of the
> render, there is no need for this transform stage you describe.
> >
> > I thought that's what was happening, at least as I understand it for
> > PDF the page creates objects that will eventually be fed into iText,
> > but they're not the actual iText objects (or subclasses).
>
> Ok, I haven't looked in the PDF for a while, so not 100% sure on this.
> Yeah. But then if we introduce templating framework X, then you can't do
> PDF/Mail/Excel without X if you use JSF OR Wicket OR GWT. So I'm not buying
> that this is a relevant argument.
>
>

I think that depends to some extent on what transitive dependencies you get
when you pull in JSF.  It also depends on making it possible to use jsf and
other view layers like wicket side by side in the same web deployment; in
Seam2 this was not supported.  (I know that it's the intent to support mixed
view layers in Seam3, but this would be the first time a key Seam3 feature
was JSF dependent afaik, so it will at least put that hypothesis to the
test.)

I've actually switched to using programmatic creation of pdf and mail for
the same reason I've switched from JSF to Wicket: type safety in a large
code base in the face of a continually refactored model.  That argument
isn't as valid for smaller code bases, but it means I care a lot less which
way this particular thread goes than I would have a year ago :)

-Clint

> >
>

> > >>>> Unfortunately the template engine is seeming to drive the backend
> > >>>> transformation process :(
> > >
> > > Well, yes, of course we are taking advantage of the facilities that the
> templating engine we have offers. To not do so would be madness (aka
> reinventing the wheel).
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:00, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 24 May 2010, at 16:47, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> If what I'm hearing is correct, people aren't so much concerned
> with using JSF as a templating language, but they are concerned with having
> "some kind" of templating, and the ability to access data from the current
> request.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> So far I've heard one person say this. I've heard 10-100s say they
> really like using JSF.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If that's the case, then it would be incredibly easy to plug in
> Velocity or another templating system and still provide this functionality.
> Much easier I believe, in fact, than sledgehammering JSF into a
> non-servlet-like invocation environment.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I personally think we should start with a different templating
> system (since Seam is supposed to be view-layer agnostic anyway.) But I also
> think that having parallel prototyping going on is a good thing, we can use
> everyone's combined experiences with the prototypes to come up with a truly
> decoupled and user-centric system.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Right now, JSF is the key thing to get implemented.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> My big question is... JSF templating is nice, but... what do
> people truly need?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thoughts?
> > >>>>>> --Lincoln
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Nikolay,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I think it would help people understand your proposal better if
> you gave an example of your proposed syntax using another templating engine.
> Perhaps take one of the example emails from Seam2 and rewrite it...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 24 May 2010, at 05:01, Nikolay Elenkov wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 2010/05/24 12:46, Gavin King wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Nikolay Elenkov <
> nick at sarion.co.jp> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I don't know how much better JSF2 is at this, but is it really
> a good idea to
> > >>>>>>>>> use JSF for the mail module? Wouldn't it be better to use a
> real templating
> > >>>>>>>>> engine (like Velocity) and not depend on JSF?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Huh?! What on earth does velocity have that makes it a "real"
> > >>>>>>>> templating engine that facelets does not have? I have used both,
> and I
> > >>>>>>>> found velocity far, far poorer in both syntax and semantics.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> OK, bad wording on my part. The point was not be dependent on
> JSF. I am not
> > >>>>>>> saying that Velocity is better. But it does allow you to have
> template that
> > >>>>>>> are not XML files.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Plus it would be easier
> > >>>>>>>>> to edit templates if they are not xhtml files, but simple text
> files.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Why? Cos XML files are not text files? Cos #foo #end is easier
> to edit
> > >>>>>>>> than <foo></end>? I don't see how what you just wrote can
> possibly be
> > >>>>>>>> true.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Yes, it is. Especially if you are not a developer. You can just
> tell people:
> > >>>>>>> 'don't touch this things starting with #, otherwise just edit in
> notepad'.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> The usual
> > >>>>>>>>> use case for mail templating is to provide files your users can
> edit if they
> > >>>>>>>>> want to customize how email looks like. And you can't really
> expect them to
> > >>>>>>>>> understand xhtml.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> They are XML files. I can't imagine a Java developer who doesn't
> know
> > >>>>>>>> XML. I do know several Java developers who find velocity syntax
> > >>>>>>>> nausea-inducing. I'm one of them.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Again, this is not about pro-Velocity, anit-Faceltes. The people
> that would have
> > >>>>>>> to edit templates are *users*, not *Java developers*. If you have
> to call up
> > >>>>>>> your developers just to change the email template, you have
> failed at usability.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Please try actually reading the Seam mail documentation:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> http://docs.jboss.com/seam/1.1.5.GA/reference/en/html/mail.html
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I have. I've also been thorough the source, tried to use it and
> then gave up.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I don't see how most of the functionality could be achieved in
> > >>>>>>>> velocity, eg. <m:from>, <m:to>, <m:subject>, <m:header>.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> s/velocity/any templating engine you might like/g. I am repeating
> myself here,
> > >>>>>>> but you cannot reallisticaly expect users to mess around with
> <m:header> and not
> > >>>>>>> break the system.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>> seam-dev mailing list
> > >>>>>>> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>> seam-dev mailing list
> > >>>>>> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Lincoln Baxter, III
> > >>>>>> http://ocpsoft.com
> > >>>>>> http://scrumshark.com
> > >>>>>> "Keep it Simple"
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> seam-dev mailing list
> > >>>>> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Jason Porter
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Software Engineer
> > >>>> Open Source Advocate
> > >>>>
> > >>>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > >>>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Gavin King
> > >>> gavin.king at gmail.com
> > >>> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> > >>> http://hibernate.org
> > >>> http://seamframework.org
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Gavin King
> > >> gavin.king at gmail.com
> > >> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> > >> http://hibernate.org
> > >> http://seamframework.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jason Porter
> >
> > Software Engineer
> > Open Source Advocate
> >
> > PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> > PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lincoln Baxter, III
> > http://ocpsoft.com
> > http://scrumshark.com
> > "Keep it Simple"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> seam-dev mailing list
> seam-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
>

-- 
Clint Popetz
http://42lines.net
Scalable Web Application Development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/seam-dev/attachments/20100524/cf2bae61/attachment-0001.html 