Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] Proposal for Texo Component

I get confused. If Texo can work without PMF, Texo has to implement most of
the concepts proposed and realized in PMF. As I said PMF is abstract and
high level infrastructure, it seems to me Texo as a specific implementation
for JSF. Some other projects can use PMF as well to provide other solutions
such as RCP on SWT. And furthermore, PMF, without a specific generator,
cannot be used directly by users. So PMF+Texo should be a complete solution
for JSF for Web application. I cannot understand why you need force Texo's
users to use PMF.

>So for now I would say that the two projects start separately and work
together when some results have been achieved.

So we probably waste our energy on both sides to implement the same
concepts. 

Yves
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Taal [mailto:mtaal@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:45 PM
To: Yves YANG
Cc: 'EMFT Developer Mailing List'; 'PMC members mailing list'
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] Proposal for Texo Component

Hi Yves,
I think Texo can integrate with pmf but it should also work without pmf. 
As I don't want to force users of Texo to also use pmf. So for me pmf is 
an additional component. As you say, the same applies the other way 
around pmf can be used as the basis for generators for other target 
platforms as well.
So for now I would say that the two projects start separately and work 
together when some results have been achieved.

gr. Martin

Yves YANG wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Does it mean that Texo could be an extension of PMF for JSF? If so, whould
> we setup PMF project first in order that both team works closely?  
>
> yves
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Taal [mailto:mtaal@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:11 PM
> To: Yves YANG
> Cc: 'EMFT Developer Mailing List'; 'PMC members mailing list'
> Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] Proposal for Texo Component
>
> Hi Yves,
> I think this is more a terminology thing, with Ui-model I mean what you 
> are refering to so definition of master/detail, selection dialog, page 
> flows etc. and not the technical ui implementation. So afaics we mean 
> the same thing.
>
> gr. Martin
>
> Yves YANG wrote:
>   
>> I don't know which the presentation modeling framework you are talking
>> about. I have prepared a project named as PMF (presentation modeling
>> framework). But it is NOT an UI-model like XUL, XAML. It is an abstract
>> modeling framework that implements the presentation patterns like data
>> binding, page flows, Master/Detail etc. Each technology like JSF, SWT,
GWT
>> then can implement its generator. Please find the draft in the attached
>> file.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Yves YANG
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: emft-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:emft-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>     
> On
>   
>> Behalf Of Martin Taal
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:54 PM
>> To: PMC members mailing list
>> Cc: EMFT Developer Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] Proposal for Texo Component
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>> Depends on how you look at it. On the one hand the artifacts generated 
>> are editable using wtp (for example jsp editor, dali project). On the 
>> other hand the Texo project does not need to make use of any component 
>> currently present in wtp while it uses (and tightly integrates with) 
>> emf, mwe, jmerge, teneo and xpand. Also the ideas for a ui-model (the 
>> presentation modeling framework) will be used by Texo. In addition it is 
>> the idea to make it possible to extend the solution with custom 
>> templates/workflows. So as there is a definite and large modeling side 
>> to it I would say that it belongs to modeling.
>>
>> gr. Martin
>>
>> Christian Damus wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can one also make an argument for locating this component in the Web
>>>       
> Tools
>   
>>> Platform project?  It seems to me that Texo is more of a model-driven
web
>>> application development tool (and WTP is all about developing web apps)
>>> than it is a framework for building modeling tools or even a big-M
>>>     
>>>       
>> modeling
>>   
>>     
>>> app.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Christian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Christian W. Damus
>>> Component Lead, Eclipse OCL and EMF MQ/MT/VF
>>> IBM Rational Software
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>     
>>>   From:       Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>
>>   
>>     
>>>   To:         PMC members mailing list <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>
>>   
>>     
>>>   Cc:         modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx, EMFT Developer Mailing
>>>     
>>>       
>> List <emft-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, PMC members mailing list              
>>   
>>     
>>>               <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>
>>   
>>     
>>>   Date:       04/16/2008 09:04 AM
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>
>>   
>>     
>>>   Subject:    Re: [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev] Proposal for Texo
>>>     
>>>       
>> Component                                                               
>>   
>>
>>   
>>     
>>>
>>> Sven,
>>>
>>> Once-only code generators really do suck, so you have to wonder at their
>>> preponderance given how relatively trivial it was to build Java merge
>>> support. The original design and implementation of JMerge took roughly a
>>> week of effort, as a I recall.  EMP is definitely a great basis for
>>> building DSLs with the added benefit that they all have a common
>>>     
>>>       
>> underlying
>>   
>>     
>>> meta model to ensure that we don't end up with just a Tower of Babel.
In
>>> addition, we aren't suffering from the misguided belief that XML syntax
>>>       
> is
>   
>>> the be-all-and-end-all of human readable notations.
>>>
>>> In our quest toward a grand vision, I think it's best to start small and
>>>     
>>>       
>> to
>>   
>>     
>>> build the little pieces bottom rather than carve out a grand high level
>>> space top down.  We also have to consider our project's charter and be
>>> sensitive to the concerns that the scope of the modeling project could
>>>     
>>>       
>> just
>>   
>>     
>>> creep out to consume all other projects.   Many DSLs would most
logically
>>> live in other projects and we'd be best off to ensure that things evolve
>>>     
>>>       
>> in
>>   
>>     
>>> that direction when it makes the most sense.  So for the time being, I'd
>>> rather avoid creating more direct child projects under the modeling
>>> project.  Having a small number of projects to group the large number of
>>> components seems appropriate...
>>>
>>>
>>> Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
>>> mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> 905-413-3265  (t/l 313)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>              Sven Efftinge
>>>              <sven@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>              >
>>>       
> To
>   
>>>              Sent by:                  EMFT Developer Mailing List
>>>              modeling-pmc-boun         <emft-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, PMC
>>>       
> members
>   
>>>              ces@xxxxxxxxxxx           mailing list
>>>                                        <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>>       
> cc
>   
>>>              04/16/2008 07:12
>>>              AM
>>>       
> Subject
>   
>>>                                        [modeling-pmc] Re: [emft-dev]
>>>                                        Proposal for Texo Component
>>>              Please respond to
>>>                 PMC members
>>>                mailing list
>>>              <modeling-pmc@ecl
>>>                  ipse.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> this sounds very cool. We all know that there are many general
>>> frameworks (web, RCP, SOA, etc,) out there which would profit from
>>> generators.
>>> Some of them (Ruby on Rails, Grails, SEAM just to name a few) already
>>> use code generation a lot.
>>> Unfortunately they use wizard-style passive code generation, where you
>>> generate once and further change the generated code manually.
>>> So most of the time generators are just used to get users up and
>>> running as fast as possible.
>>> Also they come up with concise languages to descibe domain models
>>> (internal DSLs).
>>> Those languages are not statically typed, have to fit into the host's
>>> syntax and have no tool support at all (EMP can do better).
>>> IMHO there should be some more projects like Texo, which show how EMP
>>> can be used.
>>>
>>> As EMFT is for EMF technology I find that those projects don't fit
>>> well there. We should create a new Project for such domain-specific
>>> applications of EMP.
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> atb,
>>> Sven
>>>
>>> btw: +1
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2008, at 12:34 , Ed Merks wrote:
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>>>> Extended EMF Community,
>>>>
>>>> Martin Taal, the lead for the Teneo component, recently announced his
>>>> intent to work on the Texo component which will focus on exploiting
>>>> modeling technology for building web applications.
>>>>
>>>>   http://wiki.eclipse.org/Texo
>>>>
>>>> I request the community's approval to create this new component as
>>>> part of
>>>> the EMFT subproject with Martin Taal as the component lead.  Please
>>>> reply
>>>> with +1 or -1 on this thread.  Obviously I recommend you give a +1,
>>>> given
>>>> Martin's outstanding track record with Teneo and his exemplary
>>>> support for
>>>> it.  All EMF and EMFT committers are eligible to vote, so please
>>>> take a
>>>> moment to do so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
>>>> mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>> 905-413-3265  (t/l 313)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> emft-dev mailing list
>>>> emft-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emft-dev
>>>>     
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> --
>>> Sven Efftinge
>>>
>>> Phone: +49 431 5606335
>>> Fax     :  +49 431 5606339
>>> Mobile: +49 175 5274726
>>>
>>> web: http://www.itemis.de
>>> blog: http://effi-blog.blogspot.com
>>> team-blog: http://apps.itemis.de/roller/itemislabkiel
>>> mail: sven.efftinge@xxxxxxxxx
>>> xing: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Efftinge
>>>
>>> itemis AG
>>> Schauenburgerstra├če 116
>>> 24118 Kiel
>>> Germany
>>>
>>> Rechtlicher Hinweis:
>>> Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621
>>> Vorstand: Wolfgang Neuhaus, Jens Wagener, Dr. Georg Pietrek
>>> Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Burkhard Igel(Vors.), Stephan Grollmann, Michael
>>> Neuhaus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> modeling-pmc mailing list
>>> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> emft-dev mailing list
>>> emft-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/emft-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> modeling-pmc mailing list
>>> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
>>>
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>>   
>>     
>
>   

-- 

With Regards, Martin Taal

Springsite/Elver.org
Office: Hardwareweg 4, 3821 BV Amersfoort
Postal: Nassaulaan 7, 3941 EC Doorn
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 (0)84 420 2397
Fax: +31 (0)84 225 9307
Mail: mtaal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - mtaal@xxxxxxxxx
Web: www.springsite.com - www.elver.org



Back to the top