Progress is slowly being made and my perceptions of Xpages are constantly changing (not always in the same direction)....
First I wish to revise my statements from yesterday's blog about Server-Sided Javascript. Tim Tripcony wrote an excellent article in which he pointed out some of the inaccuracies in my characterizations of server-sided Javascript. It seems that server-sided JavaScript should largely be considered a distinctly different language from client-sided (traditional) JavaScript. They both just follow the same general language syntax (just as LotusScript and VB.Net do). It's a shame IBM chose to use the same name rather than coming up with a new name like LJScript of LotusJScript for this new language to make that distinction. So I was wrong: Server sided JavaScript is (or can be) strongly typed. Tim has also suggested how the JavaScript characteristic of closure can be used as a way to implement a level of OOP. There are in fact a lot of discussion in the wider development community about Javascript and OOP. Much of this exploits JavaScript's ability to define objects and then extend them using the proptotype statement. Combined with closure this provides various techniques in which classes etc can potentially be implemented/simulated. I would still rather see native support for OOL built into the programming language. And perhaps given the way IBM have implemented server sided JavaScrript it may be that in time IBM will add these concepts directly to the language. If they don't, you can expct to see a .Domino Framework 2.0 that does!
But every time I look at the issue of programming language support I still keep coming back to the one question. What is it that IBM is planning to do? I may not agree 100% with their plans but at least if I know where they are heading it might force to me jump off the fence. e.g. If IBM's focus in the short-medium term will be to extend the capabilities of XPages and do very little with the other design elements then Notes developers would be smart to do the heavy lift of learning how to build applications with XPages. If IBM's plans for programming language support is to extend server-sided JavaScript and leave LotusScript as it is (including leaving it out of XPages).then it would be better for LS developers like me to focus on learning/using this new language and largely forgetting about LS. If this isn't clarified clearly I suspect a lot of developers will be tempted to sit on the fence. LotusScript, Forms, Views, Outlines, and Framesets are all within most Notes developer's comfort zone. XPages and server-sided Javascript involves a lot of "pain".
So on to today's observations.....
The Good: Drag/Drop - This is not new stuff for non-Notes development. Products such as Visual Studio, Eclipse, and even VISIO have long supported the ability to drag/drop elements from a toolbox onto visual design elements. It is such an intuitive way to work and way more productive to create an Xpage this way. DDE 8.5.0 is still a little clunky when you try to drag/drop the controls around the Xpage after they have been created. But this is largely a 1.0 release so it is perhaps not surprising. I would hope that IBM add this same capability to forms and pages at a later stage as it is already hard to go back to the old way.
The Bad: Documentation - One of the biggest limitations I am finding at the moment is the difficulty in getting a detailed understanding about how Xpages and server-sided JavaScript works (LotusJScript ;) ). With Xpages I am finding that I am drawing more on my previous, short, experience as a C# ASP.Net developer than my many years as a Notes developer. Many Notes developers are not as lucky and must be struggling even more than I to understand important new concepts such as application, session, page lifecycle events clinet sided v server sided etc. It would be great if there were a few redbooks, technical books etc that we could consult like a bible while enduring those first few days/week/smonths (years?) as an XPage developer. I remember when I first learnt LotusScript how much I consulted my LotusScript book to figure out how to write my code.
Ratings
0
Comments (2)
Peter, I couldn't agree with you more re the lack of authoritative tomes, especially on the scripting of XPages. When I was learning to develop my first Notes 4.6 apps, I kept Redbooks beside my bed. They were application cookbooks. Not only were they practical and interesting reading, but after I read enough, I got a good sleep too.
What's Lotus' answer for today? WIKIS! Lotus seems to believe that
Wikis are some sort of panacea for closing the learning gap. Not
good enough! Wikis are unstructured and poorly organized for
learning. They are a hodge podge of loosely connected tips and
articles without a common theme, purpose or direction. They don't
have a beginning with basic concepts nor have a progression to more
advanced topics.
That said, they are invaluable for mining tips and tricks to help
you with a specific programming issue.
For me, I'm looking forward to getting the XPages course from
TLCC.com in July.
I don't ever drag and drop in the editor window myself if I can do the rearranging in the outline. Especially with table stuff. rows, columns, cells, etc. That outline is my favorite piece of the new designer and xpages.
Documentation will happen but yes we need far more. But I expect it
more in line with what Declan wrote vs an old fashioned redbook.