Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [json] jabsorb 1.2.2 released

Expand Messages
  • Martin Cooper
    ... That sounds a lot like DWR. Can you provide a brief comparison? -- Martin Cooper The most important feature in the jabsorb 1.2.x release line is an
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 16, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      On Jan 16, 2008 4:19 PM, Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@...> wrote:

      > I'm very pleased to announce the release of jabsorb 1.2.2.
      >
      > jabsorb is a simple and lightweight (yet quite powerful) Ajax/Web
      > 2.0framework that allows you to call methods in a Java web application
      > from
      > JavaScript code running in a web browser as if they were local objects
      > residing directly in the browser.


      That sounds a lot like DWR. Can you provide a brief comparison?

      --
      Martin Cooper


      The most important feature in the jabsorb 1.2.x release line is an extension
      > to the JSON-RPC protocol that allows passing of data structures with
      > circular and duplicate references.
      >
      > With jabsorb 1.2.2 the json-rpc-client project has been combined with
      > jabsorb to include an additional Java client to the jabsorb server.
      > Special
      > thanks to Sasha Ovanskin for this immensely useful contribution.
      >
      > Additionally, the jabsorb team has recently rolled out a whole new web
      > site,
      > wiki and infrastructure at http://jabsorb.org
      >
      > To download this release, visit http://jabsorb.org/Download
      > For general information on jabsorb, visit http://jabsorb.org
      > For discussion, questions or comments, visit
      > http://groups.google.com/group/jabsorb-user
      >
      > Cheers!
      > Arthur Blake
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Arthur Blake
      ... I m not a DWR expert, but from what I understand, both libraries fulfill the same basic purposes. The main difference that I ve always touted is: jabsorb
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 17, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        >
        > On Jan 16, 2008 11:07 PM, Martin Cooper <mfncooper@...> wrote:
        > On Jan 16, 2008 4:19 PM, Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@...<arthur.blake%40gmail.com>>
        > wrote:
        >
        > > I'm very pleased to announce the release of jabsorb 1.2.2.
        > >
        > > jabsorb is a simple and lightweight (yet quite powerful) Ajax/Web
        > > 2.0framework that allows you to call methods in a Java web application
        > > from
        > > JavaScript code running in a web browser as if they were local objects
        > > residing directly in the browser.
        >
        > That sounds a lot like DWR. Can you provide a brief comparison?
        >
        > --
        > Martin Cooper


        I'm not a DWR expert, but from what I understand, both libraries fulfill the
        same basic purposes.

        The main difference that I've always touted is:

        jabsorb is based on JSON-RPC standard (although with new circular references
        support, standard JSON-RPC is extended)
        DWR uses it's own inherent protocol, but new JSON features are being added.
        DWR also has some built in support for reverse ajax. This can be done with
        jabsorb too, but it's not as integrated like it is with DWR.
        DWR appears to have a larger code base and more bells and whistles, while
        jabsorb is a bit lighter and simpler.

        So it appears that the libraries are currently converging in their feature
        sets, somewhat.

        Both jabsorb and DWR have been been around for quite awhile. jabsorb was
        formerly known as JSON-RPC-Java. (It was originally forked off of
        JSON-RPC-Java, but then the parent project joined jabsorb to form a unified
        project, yet retaining the jabsorb name.)

        It would be nice to hear some pros and cons from anyone who has used both
        libraries extensively.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.