|
This was a very enlightening read. I do see where I am still thinking like a midrange programmer, but I also see the tendency to assume that if we did use JSPs, Beans and Servlets that it would all be done correctly and in a best case scenario. As we know, this is never the case. CGI isn't perfect, I'll admit that. But, in a best case scenario, a lot can be done. JSPs, beans and servlets aren't perfect either. In a best case scenario, again, a lot can be done. But we have to remember that no one is perfect, not every shop as a team of programmers, another of web designers, etc.. etc... which is seems is the assumption when comparing these technologies. Brad > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Pluta [mailto:joepluta@plutabrothers.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 10:12 AM > To: JAVA400-L@midrange.com > Subject: RE: beans and JSPs and stuff... > > > "I tend to use control or attribute files that hold > attributes for certain > pieces of the page. Also, I use style sheets very extensivley." > ---------- > I find that people want to design their own pages, or > outsource the page development to another firm that > specializes in web content design. What if the customer > wants to move to a different application server with > different tags? Or if they simply want to add something that > you haven't thought of? They'll have to go through your code > to change that stuff. > > You have two possibilities: a servlet that delivers a > complete web page from top to bottom with little or no > control by the customer (other than some "attributes" which > you've chosen), or a component based design where widgets > supply dynamic data in a component manner to be placed on the > web page as the designer wishes. > > You methodology is equivalent to the same monolithic > programming practices that midrange programmers have used > forever: the programmer designs the interface from top to > bottom, and when the end user needs a change, they have to > ask the programmer to change something and recompile the code. > > If, on the other hand, you deliver flexible data components > that can be placed anywhere on the screen, this allows a > designer the ability to design the page however they see fit. > The more loosely you couple the widgets with the page > content, the more flexible the design is. > > The end user can go to an outside firm that has web content > expertise to design the pages. They simply need to leave > "holes" in the website where the dynamic components go. In > my opinion, there's no way you design a professional website > without this level of separation. There isn't an RPG > programmer (or Java programmer) out there who knows both the > nuances of business programming and the ins and outs of web > design. If you try to do both, you're likely going to be > mediocre at one, if not both. > > > "Assume you have an engine that allows customer to order > t-shirts. But, > there are 100 different companies you're acting as a server > for. Each of > the 100 companies has a different "face" to their website. > > Using JSPs the way I think your describing them means you > would need at > least one JSP for each company, then multiply that by how > many "pages" the > site has." > --------- > Absolutely incorrect. But you might think that, because > you're not an expert web designer - you're an expert > programmer. An expert web designer will design a single JSP > that in turn uses a style sheet. For common business > functions (such as file maintenance) it's easy to build a > common widget that can be plunked into a simple JSP - this > gives you many file maintenance progams with one widget. At > the same time, you can set the style by included a style > sheet in the JSP, thereby allowing different users to have > different styles. And all of this can be under the control > of a web content designer, where it belongs, and not a programmer. > > I don't know if you've ever seen the amount of work involved > in creating a really creative and good-looking web site - > take a look at http://www.edeployment.com for an example. > The number of iterations that went through was incredible - > to have to recompile a servlet every time we wanted to make a > change in an image or a position would have killed us. > > > "Using an attribute file I can use one CGI program (Servlet, > eRPG, etc), read > the attributes for the site and then dynamically build my HTML. No > hardcoding (you learn not to do that right away, at least I did)." > ----------- > Yes you can, and as long as I like what the programmer thinks > looks good, then I'm in good shape. In the real world, my > clients each have their own idea about what looks good and > what doesn't. Some want splash screens, some want frames, > some want bottom border navigation, some want drop down > menus. Some find their own applets to use. With the CGI > approach, every change like this requires programming - > programming that can in turn break the original, working > code. It's a terribly bad design decision to have to > recompile the code that delivers dynamic business data > whenever you need to change the site's appearance. > > > "I find it hard to believe that a non-programmer could do > anything more than > a very simple JSP code, and most sites aren't simple. When you say > non-programmer, do you mean someone like my mom (Manager of > GNC for the past > 10000 years), or do you mean a "super user" who understands > iteration and > boolean checks, HTML and web design, but doesn't necesarily > know how to > "program". I assume you are leaning closer to the latter, > but when you say > "any user" you're really bending the definition to a point that is > misunderstood by some." > --------- > By non-programmer, I mean "web content designer". An expert > web content designer probably has as much or more technical > knowledge about HIS area of expertise as you or I do in ours. > It's just that their expertise doesn't involve RPG or Java - > it instead involves HTML and style sheets and ColdFusion and > Dreamweaver. While it's feasible for an RPG programmer to > become an expert in DDS design, it is not possible for > someone to be expert in the wildly disparate disciplines of > programming and web content design. And so, if you want to > take advantage of really good web design, you'll need to > separate the programming from the web content. > > And this is why CGI programming is bad. Period. If you > program CGI, either in RPG or in Java (servlets without JSP > is essentially CGI), then you are locking your clients into > your idea of what a good web page is, and frankly, web > content beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder. > > Joe > > > +--- > | This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to > JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net > +--- > +--- | This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.