Home arrow Apache arrow Page 3 - Introducing Simple Components in Apache Tapestry

Implicit vs. declared components - Apache

In the previous article, you witnessed the interplay between a Tapestry page and its components (granted, we had only one simple component there, but you get my point). Page class, when rendering its page, finds any components mentioned in the template and asks those components to display themselves, as they know better how to do that. Components, in their turn, might need some information to display themselves, and they ask the page class to provide the necessary information by calling some of its methods.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:
  1. Introducing Simple Components in Apache Tapestry
  2. What is OGNL?
  3. Implicit vs. declared components
  4. GuessTheWord project
  5. Creating mock ups
  6. Which components shall we need?
By: Alexander Kolesnikov
Rating: starstarstarstarstar / 28
April 23, 2007

print this article
SEARCH DEV SHED

TOOLS YOU CAN USE

advertisement

You have seen just one Tapestry component so far, so this discussion will be unavoidably abstract, but I still think it will be useful to prepare you to understand what will come later.

The obvious advantage of the implicit components (fully described in the HTML template) is that you can see everything related to this component in one place: how and where it is used on the page, what its type is and what it is bound to in the page class. You donít have to look into another file or page specification to find out any additional information.

The obvious disadvantage of this approach is that if a component has several bindings (in some cases there can be three or even more bindings), the page's HTML code gets cluttered with weird nonstandard attributes and maybe also complex OGNL expressions.

The advantage of the declared components is that you have them listed all neat and orderly in the page specification. Having multiple bindings is not a problem and complex OGNL expressions are welcome here.

The disadvantage of the declared components is obvious when you have a component without any bindings (you will see one such component soon), or with only one simple binding. The proper specification for such a component will be more verbose than its implicit declaration.

In practice, I find myself combining the two approaches. When a component has no bindings, I define it implicitly. When it has more than one binding, I declare it in page specification. In the case of simple components, like Insert, I might define them either way depending on the complexity of the page design. If the page is large and its design is complex, I will prefer declared components over implicit ones.

It is the time now to have more practice and to meet more components. Letís create another project, this time having two Tapestry pages.



 
 
>>> More Apache Articles          >>> More By Alexander Kolesnikov
 

blog comments powered by Disqus
escort Bursa Bursa escort Antalya eskort
   

APACHE ARTICLES

- Apache Unveils Cassandra 1.2
- Apache on ARM Chips? Dell and Calxeda Help M...
- The Down Side of Open Source Software
- VMware Unveils Serengeti for Apache Hadoop
- SAP Takes Steps to Improve Hadoop Integration
- Looking to Hone Apache Hadoop Skills?
- How to Install Joomla on WAMPP
- Working with XAMPP and Wordpress
- GUI Available for Apache Camel
- Reduce Server Load for Apache and PHP Websit...
- Creating a VAMP (Vista, Apache, MySQL, PHP) ...
- Putting Apache in Jail
- Containing Intrusions in Apache
- Server Limits for Apache Security
- Setting Permissions in Apache

Developer Shed Affiliates

 


Dev Shed Tutorial Topics: