Michael Slattery makes a good observation in a comment on my last JSF podcast.
I generally enjoy your podcasts. [...] I have some feedback. It seems like you are complaining mostly about an implementation of JSF rather than the spec itself.
Much of my chatter has centered around examples involving the actual implementation. Let me step back and summarize my podcast main points from the standpoint of the spec:
1. The JSF spec indicates exclusive use of POST. That breaks all kinds of RESTful idioms and paradigms that good websites are based on. Strike one.
2. The JSF spec itself attempts to create a component model with a lifecycle that obscures the underlying HTTP request-response cycle. It’s a Leaky Abstraction, and it does more harm than good. Strike two.
3. The JSF spec defines the concept of a RenderKit; a concept that places HTML far away from page content and creates an abstraction that most people won’t need but everyone must deal with. Oh, and it turns the page definition into an XML config file, forcing my view logic back into the controller area. Strike three.
Many of the annoyances I listed are stated in an implementation specific way, but my philosophical differences truly lie with the spec. Perhaps it’s a forest vs trees thing. In any case, it evidently wasn’t clear that the spec was to blame for the issues discussed in my podcasts.
Oh. I almost forgot. One more:
4. The JSF spec is a spec for a web framework(!?). So the rest of the problems I have with substandard implementations are indirectly caused because there’s a spec in the first place. If there was just a single, high-quality framework it would eliminate the chatter of choosing among several implementations and focus disucssion on the underlying merits of it’s approach to web development. Will the next web framework please step up to bat?
Merlin Mann has an interesting take on podcasting here:
Flash: “Podfading” ravages the landscape of logorrheic bloggers
Me? I like the idea that a podcast is simply another way to post. Nothing more. Same way that Flickr and del.icio.us — to name just a couple — let me share something in a way that isn’t a traditional blog post, recording audio lets me (try to) make a certain point in my own way and with tone (and, one hopes, personality) that are a contrast with typically dry blog writing. But maybe that’s just me.
Agreed. 100%. I view the Zdot podcast as an extension of my blog. It lets me speak about things I’d rather speak about, and write about things I’d rather write about. My frequency isn’t tied to a radio show paradigm, but to my interests. It seems this works well for most of my listeners, too.
This is the final part of my three-part series on why JSF isn’t my personal choice for future development work. I focus on the woes of the doing HTML interfaces in JSF.
Download JSF Part 3.
The major problems I speak to:
- The HTML put out by today’s JSF components is neither standards compliant or semantically meaningful. Take a look around the web, and you’ll see all sorts of movements that require good, semantic, standards compliant HTML. JSF’s rederings are stuck in 1999.
- The HTML for the components is very far away from the page layout (it’s in the RenderKit). To fix HTML problems, programmers will likely find workarounds instead of fixing the problem. That’s a set of Broken Windows waiting to happen (see The Pragmatic Programmer) . It doesn’t encourage the kind of clean programming that I think it ought to.
- RenderKits are an artifact of the Architecture Astronauts. They are so unlikely to be used for the purpose for which they were designed that they create more pain than solution. (Will all seven of you using your JSF for HTML and WML please stand up?)
- Finally, JSF turns JSP almost, if not entirely, into a data language (or declarative language) instead of an imperative language. The page layout is used to configure the component tree, and has no direct representation of executable statements like “if” and “for”. Some view this as a triumph; I think it’s a tragedy.
Again, I’d rather be solving the business problems than finding workarounds to these restrictions and annoyances of JSF. If you’re interested in reading and hearing more, please see my previous posts here, here and here.
UPDATE: The mp3 file should now be in the right spot. Serves me right for posting in a rush. Sorry. While I’m at it, I might as well claim my Odeo channel (odeo/0f55e88149deb27e). Enjoy.
