Re: Scriptaculous integration

>  >
>  > To me Aida's one are obvious:
>
> I would add:
>  - ajax integration (you don't even know that you use ajax),

possible in seaside too. Look at michel bany ajax integration...

I know you use ajax, and I see a ref to 'javascript:nic()'...

>  - components (like seaside)
>  - MVC and observer pattern
>
>
>  > -REST
>  > -In smalltalk (too :) )
>  > -really enough for 90% of web site and apps (or even 99% or even
>  > 99,9999% depending on your background)  :)

I just put the obvious one wich is REST to me.

Rob (I'm sure you got it) but REST is about having nice URL without
dynamic variables inside ;)

and THIS is what attracts me to Aida. I've some friend owning a web
company. And without REST, no way to make them accept smalltalk... :(

>
> Don't think that Aida is less powerful than Seaside. They both have
>  their own advantages.

you're changing my words... ;) and so what are these advantages ? I
mean seaside one according to you over Aida ?


>
>  Can you show me some seaside code with nice looking urls? you can't do
>  it easily, because of continuations.

Personnaly, I don't care... but I agree and this is the strong
advantage of aida against seaside.

>  Can you show me some seaside app I won't be able to do with aida? very
>  difficult, because even if both frameworks don't use the same tools,
>  they both have their answers to the same problems.

Probably too tiny example, but back button with POST request is not
working properly in Aida.

http://www.squeakside.com/seaside/exxx   then hit flow and use the
second link... you can -use/abuse back button, refresh and the result
is consistent.

In your counter example:
-http://nico.bioskop.fr/counter.html

back button behavior is equivalent to repeat the action. refresh
also... so this lead to strange behavior. But, again I agree, this big
flashing POST warning should prevent everybody to do that ...

That's exactlty why I asked (no answer so far):
>  Could you imagine treating POST method as redirect as seaside do ?
>  Maybe this would remove this limit (don't know though if it's possible
>  without continuation stuff...)

Seaside treat POST with a redirect, could this be a solution to that
problem ? or you don't consider being a problem. So, you must forbid
button and use link instead (this is where html sucks :) ).


>
>  I worked a lot with Seaside in the past, and I assure you that you can
>  do (almost) the same things with both. For some apps, it will be easier
>  with Aida, for some others, it will be easier with Seaside.
>

I agree with that (all). So now that you say "almost". Can you be more
precise ? ;)

As far as people say... "we do the same" or  "we do more"... Choosing
a framework is then just not an objective decision...


----- To Rob

> > I'm a dreamer ;) Aida, for port 80 and seaside for 443 :)

> I KNOW I am missing a cultural reference there!

80 is for port 80, the usual http port whereas 443 is https port (the
secure one). I just put that because to me, "80" is REST and for 443,
we don't care...



Cédrick
_______________________________________________
Aida mailing list
Aida@...
http://lists.aidaweb.si/mailman/listinfo/aida