In last year’s JSF Burrito podcasts, I argued that I didn’t see the point of using a strong component model for JSF and that throwing away nice HTTP RESTful URIs is a Bad Thing. In an interview with InfoQ, DHH takes up a similar (though probably more polite) stance.

InfoQ: DHH Responds to Stateful Web Applications Row

[There is an] assumption that all web developers really want to be desktop developers and that all web applications would be better if only they were more like their desktop counterparts. I don’t accept that assumption. I love working with the web as it is. I love the architectural patterns offered by HTTP and REST.

So in many ways, I see chasing a desktop-like view of the web as chasing the past, not the future.

I’ve written about my reactions to JSF one year after the burrito entries. I find myself clearly in the camp that DHH is in: making desktop-like web apps is chasing the past, using RESTful style development is an approach I prefer.

A number of months ago we held an internal debate over XUL, and its place in our development. For the most part, we debated many sides of the issue and came out with “let’s wait and see.” Basically the core of the debate was whether a desktop-like UI is better for our apps or if a web model was more appropriate. Some of us leaned toward the web app side, some just thought the timing was too soon to tell for XUL. Personally, I prefer to keep all the MVC issues on the controller side, and limit JavaScript on the client to handle issues of rapid user feedback (check out the code behind Google’s “star” in GMail), and leave the control flow and rendering decisions to the server-side.

But that’s just me.

comments powered by Disqus