-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
-----Original Message-----
Ah. Are you by any chance saying that some "preferred" way of
organizing the work of Web teams has been allowed to influence
the architecture of specific technologies ?
I think it's possible. I also think it's possible to get my cause
and effect backways, so I'm wary of coming off the fence on that
one.
I assume this is what you are saying. Under this assumption,
there is one circumstance under which it seems to me that
avoiding JSP will make sense : when the team under consideration
has a different idea of how their work should be organized. Does
this reasoning strike you as sound ?
Yes. But I'd like to try and qualify it: the thing with building
web sites is that it often requires the input of different parts of
the organisation as it is built (as opposed to at requirements),
web sites often serve multiple business and political purposes
within the organisation. Setups where the designers, content folk
and page builders were in-housed in the marketing department, while
the programmers were Somewhere Else or outside the organisation
entire (sometimes the designers also) are common enough. It's very
difficult sometimes to coordinate the organisation around the
project. You could say that too many customers spoil the code.
If you agree to the stipulation and the reasoning, wouldn't you
also agree that enterprises "under the influence" of XP are very
likely to have a different idea of team organization than others
?
Yes, but I understand the relationship between XP and
interaction/usability design to be an open issue. Interaction
designers like to see somewhat more upfront design than is found in
XP. I'm not aware of a compelling argument from either discipline,
but my bias these days is towards less design.
Having trained as a product designer and worked with highly
architected software until recently, I claim these as working
truths:
o Architecture requires the character of physical law.
o The character of physical law is not assured in software.
If you agree with these stipulations (and you are welcome to
differ, this conversation is both stimulating and
insight-laden), would you not, finally, agree with the
conclusion that XP teams will want to be wary of technologies
like JSP ?
Extremely wary; pun intended. We know it threatens test first (imo
test first is the bedrock of XP). Unit testing a client server app
makes XP awkward, some for agent systems, and concurrency, but
sometimes they have real value and should be used. I'm glad you see
that computer languages are just technologies tho'.
I think the perceived value of languages like JSP is that it
enables the non-programmers to work with the web in a more powerful
way. But as you say, programmers may pay a price in productivity.
I'd hate to admit that there is a law of conservation of
productivity, and I care a lot about the web for some reason, so
figuring out how to let everyone play at their best is important to
me. Ideally it's the visicalc effect that falls out of this rather
than pass the parcel.
On the positive I do believe that agile methods can lead you
towards a proper separation of concerns (for example I think XP
would move you to discover Mike Beedle's best practices). If you're
going to build a web site that spans organisational concerns and
requires the input of non-programmers, or routing 'content
maintenance' around programmers, XP has value.
Bill de hÓra
Post by Bill de hÃraIt's good to understand why anyone would bother inventing a new
syntax, rather than evolving an old one.
I wouldn't call JSP "old". I wouldn't call my 3- and 6- years
old kids
"old", either. Does either strike you as unreasonable ?
(I was talking about the invention of JSP syntax itself.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4
iQA/AwUBPKYTiOaWiFwg2CH4EQJTBwCfajNpcpFtuFlGbGTIxxfaQ/AYciwAoPto
03q3lPGqhnvuZ72W099h4wCn
=ajh1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: extremeprogramming-***@eGroups.com
ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/