Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to create a custom UI framework in JavaScript for web applications (like Google Docs ui) (do not confuse with web application that deploy using languages like PHP, Python, etc.). However, after reading several books about web development, I understand that the best website is layered as follows:
Structure in HTML
Presentation in CSS
Behaviour in JavaScript
So there are several approaches to creating my own HTML document and control it in JavaScript. However in this approach HTML and CSS will be mixed, like in case of extJS UI. I am confused now, and I need some answers from experienced developers on how to write this kind of framework.
If HTML, CSS, and JavaScript is mixed.
What was advantages?
What was disadvantages?
Is there are other methods?
What was the usual type of creating UI frameworks?
I apologize that this answer is extremely long and at times may seem somewhat off-topic, but please keep in mind that the question was not very specific. If it is improved, or made less general, then I will gladly remove the superfluous parts, but until then, just bear with me. This is somewhat of a compilation of the other answers here, in addition to my own thoughts and research. Hopefully my ramblings will be at least somewhat helpful for answering this question.
General Tips for Frameworks
Frameworks are a ton of work, so don't spend all of that time for nothing. Work Smarter, Not Harder. In general, you should remember these things when creating a framework:
Don't Reinvent the wheel: There are tons of great frameworks out there, and if you create a framework that does the exact same thing as another framework, you've wasted a ton of your time. Of course, understanding what goes on inside another library is a great way to make your own library better. Quoting #ShadowScripter, "knowledge -> innovation." However, don't try to rewrite jQuery by yourself. :)
Solve a Problem: All good frameworks (and programs) start with a problem they are trying to solve, then design an elegant solution to solve this problem. So don't just start writing code to "create a custom UI framework," but rather come up with a specific problem you want to solve, or something you want to make easier. jQuery makes selecting and manipulating the DOM easier. Modernizr helps developers identify the features supported by a browser. Knowing the purpose of your framework will make it more worthwhile, and may even give it a chance of becoming popular.
Fork, don't rewrite: If the problem you aim to solve is already partially solved by another framework, then fork that framework and modify it to fully fit your needs. There's no shame in building of the work of others.
Optimize and Test: This is kind of a no-brainer, but before publishing version 1.0 on your website, test every single part of the function, under every single possible scenario, to make sure it won't crash and burn in production. Also, another no-brainer, minify your code (after testing) for performance benefits.
DRY and KISS: Don't repeat yourself, and keep it simple, stupid. Pretty self-explanatory.
Stick to Stable: (This is mostly my personal opinion) Unless you're trying to create a framework specifically targetted to HTML5 in Chrome 31, using experimental features and unstable code will make your framework slower, uncompatible with older browsers, and harder to develop with.
Open Source: (Another of my opinions) It takes years for huge companies like Google with thousands of dollars invested to create frameworks (e.g. AngularJS) so it is an excellent idea to make your source openly available. Having a community of developers contributing to your project will make development faster, and will make the end product faster, bug-free, and better all around. Of course, if you're going to sell it, that's another story...
For more information about best practices when making libraries, take a look at these links:
Javascript Library Design
Javascript Module Pattern: In Depth
Best Practices in Javascript Library Design
Building a Javascript Library
Types of Frameworks
The first thing you need to think about, as mentioned above, is what functionality you want your framework to provide. Here are is the list of types of frameworks/libraries (thanks to #prong for the link). For a much more comprehensive list, see jster, which has 1478 libraries, put into 8 categories, each with several subcategories.
DOM (manipulation) related
GUI-related (Widget libraries)
Graphical/Visualization (Canvas or SVG related)
Web-application related (MVC, MVVM, or otherwise)
Pure Javascript/AJAX
Template Systems
Unit Testing
Other
As you can see from the link, there are already dozens of libraries and frameworks in each of these categories, so there's not exactly much room for something new. That being said, I don't want to discourage you- who knows, you could create the next bootstrap or jQuery. So, here are some resources about each type of framework.
Note: you can't say that any type is better than the others, they simply are designed for different goals. It's like comparing apples and oranges.
DOM (manipulation) related
These types of libraries are designed to interact with, modify, and control the DOM of a website. Here are just a few of the things they do:
Select Elements in the DOM ($("div#id .class"))
Add/Remove Elements in the DOM ($("div#id .class").remove())
Edit Attributes of Elements in the DOM ($(div#id .class).height("30px"))
Edit CSS of Elements in the DOM ($(div#id .class).css("property","value"))
Add listeners for various events taking place in the DOM ($(div#id .class).click(callback))
The most notable of these, of course, is jQuery, and it has one of the largest user bases of any Javascript library. However, it is by no means perfect, and if your library wants to compete, the best thing to do would be to make it excel in the areas that jQuery fails- speed, fragmentation, and "spaghetti" code. (The last two aren't completely in your control, but there are certainly things that you can do to make it easier for users to use the most update version, and keep their code maintainable)
GUI-related (Widget libraries)
I think that this may be the type of framework you're looking to create. These types of libraries provide widgets (datepickers, accordians, sliders, tabs, etc.), interactions (drag, drop, sort, etc.) and effects (show, hide, animations, etc.). For these, people are looking for quantity- the best frameworks out there have several useful widgets/effects that work well. This is one case where it's "the more, the merrier," of course, if it works properly.
Graphical/Visualization (Canvas or SVG related)
The purpose of these libraries is to control animations on the page, specifically on an HTML5 Canvas. These feature animations and sprites for games, interactive charts, and other animations. Again, successful graphical libraries have many, many sprites/animations. For example kineticjs has over 20 different sprites available. However, make sure that quantity does not compromise performance and overall quality.
Web-application related (MVC, MVVM, or otherwise)
Basically, the idea is to provide a layout for the users to put their code in, typically separating the model (data) from the view(what the user sees), with a small controller to provide an interface between these two. This is known as MVC. While it is by no means the only software pattern to base a framework off of, it has become quite popular recently, as it makes development much easier (that's why Rails is so popular).
Pure Javascript- AJAX
This should really be two categories. The first, AJAX libraries, are often paired with a server side library and/or database (though not always) and are designed to make connections with a server and get data asynchronously. The second, "Pure Javascript" are designed to make Javascript easier to program in, as a language, provide helpful functions and programming constructs.
Template Systems
This might also be the type of framework you're looking to create. The idea is to provide components that developers can use. There's a thin line between Template Frameworks and Widget Frameworks (which twitter bootstrap, one of the most popular template frameworks, crosses a lot). While widget frameworks just give a bunch of little elements that can be put in a site, template frameworks give structure to a website (e.g. responsive columns), in addition to making it look good.
Unit Testing
This type of framework is designed to let developers test, or systematically ensure the correctness, of their code. Pretty boring, but also really useful.
Other
This type of framework is for really specific purposes that don't really fit into any of these other categories. For example, MathQuill is designed for rendering math interactively in web pages. It doesn't really fit into any other category. However, these types of frameworks aren't bad or useless, they're just unique. A perfect example is Modernizr, a library for detecting a browser's support for features. While it doesn't really have any direct competitors, can't be put into any of the other categories, and does a very small task, it works very well, and is very popular as a result.
More Types
There are a bunch of other types of libraries. Below are the categories (I'm not listing subcategories because that would take half an hour to copy down) that JSter puts their 1478 libraries into:
Essentials
UI
Multimedia
Graphics
Data
Development
Utilities
Applications
It depends on what you really want. The first distinction that needs to be made is between a Javascript UI framework (which provides structure to the app), an HTML UI Framework (Presentation) and Widget Libs.
Javascript Frameworks such as backbone, angular, ember, and knockout provide MVC-like structure to the app.
UI frameworks such as YUI, bootstrap, and Foundation provide a consistent HTML and CSS base.
Widget Libraries such as jQuery UI, Fuel UX, and Kendo UI provide ready made widgets.
There are also fully-fledged frameworks which provide things across the board, such as Google Closure tools, Dojo with Dijit.
This Wikipedia list pretty much sums it up, and here is the comparison.
In order to find the best way to create a framework, first ask this question: Can any of the above frameworks/libraries solve all or some of the problems/requirements I have?
If something solves all the problems, you can use it right away.
If something solves your problem partially, you can start by extending/forking that project/framework.
Follow DRY and KISS rules. Only solve a problem which nobody has solved as of now.
Fortunately, there is already a good solution: Google Closure Library. This is what Google uses. It shows the approach of mixing HTML, CSS and JS. I wouldn't say it's perfect, but I believe it's one of the best ones at this moment. Its architectural principles rely on proven component based and OOP concepts, and it's accompanied with a static compiler for Javascript. It's definitely worth of studying before baking your own solution.
I'd like to say that cloudcoder2000's answer sums it up nicely. I'm just writing this answer because it didn't seem right in the comment section :P
If you are thinking of making another framework, my suggesting is to stop thinking.
First find the thing in current implementations which troubles you the most, and try to find how you can improve it. Contribute to existing projects, nearly all of them are open source anyways. Also, you don't really need to be a JS-ninja to get into their midst. Take a fork, and get started. Once you're done, and feel that you're code is good enough, make it known to the original repo's maintainers that you have done improvements, and are looking for it to be merged into the project.
Keep in mind here that I'm not discouraging you from solving the problem at all.
I'm just pointing out that there are so MANY frameworks out there, wouldn't it be better if you went ahead and contributed to one of them instead of going for complete glory and implementing a full framework yourself? Making a framework is hard, but getting people interested in your framework is HARD. Really Really HARD, even for Google! Only once Angular got a very good documentation (which itself took quite some time, and resources, of Angular evangelists), that it has gathered so much steam. So, I'm just saying that instead of creating your own monument, perhaps lending a hand to others would be a more worthwhile exercise.
Most importantly though, is the fact that since you are just starting out, I presume you wouldn't have much experience designing frameworks, or thinking in those design terms even. It would of immense value if you contribute to existing projects. Then you will be gathering knowledge and experience of how things are built. Then, you'll be more confident. Then, you can go ahead and make your own framework! Then you'll be more equipped to tackle mammoth projects such as designing a framework. And Then, my friend, will you make something which would be worth the time of countless developers.
Short answer
Build a skinny DOM and only focus on JS code to make it more efficient.
Long answer
A good architect always replies with "it depends." You can't have one single framework that enjoys all others' benefits and suffers from no disadvantages, all at once. There's always a trade-off.
In order to create a framework that is really lightweight, you would probably want the lightest DOM (HTML) structure. However, having a skinny DOM might have the cost of more JS code. So you would probably try to write the most efficient code. You can start here.
Needless to say, you should be keeping the open-close principle, and have the stylesheets separated from HTML, using only classes and never inline styling. I would suggest using less. It makes the implementation faster, and the result is pure css so you suffer from no performance issues around it.
I must respectfully disagree with cloudcoder2000,
From a young age I have been being told don't re-invent the wheel, but why?
During the last 3.5 years, I have re-invented almost all of my web controls using javascript/html/css. From the extremely complex; for example a grid, rich text editor, tree view, dialog. To the very simple, like a progress bar, dropdown. What I gained is a better understanding of html/js/css.
No pain, no gain. I'm so happy with what I was doing these years as I learned more than others.
Some of the controls I re-invented, I think, are much better than the popular ones, like telerik, jquery mobile, extJS. For example, my tree view is fully customizable, with it one can build very complex trees.
So, I encourage you re-invent the wheels, and you will definitely get more than you expected. But also, from the beginning, you need to learn the source code of the popular controls, and re-invent them. You will be very happy when you find yourself be able to make the controls better.
Then the tips on creating HTML controls:
1. use jquery;
2. write jquery plugins(jQuery.prototype...) for simple controls, while define classes for complex controls;
3. separate css from html and js files. Define the html template in js, don't use html files, which make using the controls hard.
Regards,
Leo
For best performance in your UI design, you need to use a lightweight JavaScript framework like angular or backbone, Twitter Bootstrap for the UI, AJAX for base script load and use gzip compression in your app to make it lightweight and help the UI render faster.
Disclaimer & Long Winding Question Approaching
I know topics like this have been beaten to death here so suffice to say I'm not asking about which framework is better, I don't really care about opinions on the better framework. They all do pretty amazing things.
The Question
Given that I have an existing web application, made of mostly regular HTML+CSS (jQuery where needed), which is the optimal framework to integrate a few "rich" pages into typically a regular stream of HTML.
Reason
I am trying to bring our proven application into the realm of awesome desktop like UI but I want to do it one small piece, one screen at time. But for our users, support personel and especially me taking it slow is the only option.
Also, with our branding requirements having a framework that just takes over the viewport isn't an option, it has to play nice with other HTML on the screen.
Imagine the example being a rich user manager in an otherwise plain HTML+CSS environment.
Experience Thus Far
Dojo + Dijit
Pros: The new 1.5 widgets plus the claro theme is the cure for what ails us. Dojo seems to be able to use markup to create the UI which is very appealing and has a fair amount of widgets.
Cons: Holy bloated lib Batman! Dojo seems to be enormous and I have to learn a custom build system to get it to stop requesting 4,800 javascript files. This complex empire of Javascript makes me believe I won't be able to create much that isn't already there.
ExtJS
Pros: Amazing set of widgets, does everything we could possibly want. Seems quick, every version brings new improvements.
Cons: I'm not sure how to use this without the entire display being EXT. I'm still building a web site, so I would prefer something that could integrate into what we already have. Some pointers here would be great.
YUI
Pros: Well, it's Yahoo isn't it? AWS console is downright wicked. Plenty of support and a giant community.
Cons: Well, it's Yahoo isn't it? AWS console is the only wicked thing. Complex for someone who's used to jQuery.
Help Me
I am willing to accept experience, links to ways to solve problems I've outlined, new toolkits (even though I'm pretty sure I've seen most by now) or even just advice.
Regarding ExtJS, it's pretty easy to start it in an existing div with something like this:
Ext.onReady(function() {
App = new Ext.Panel({...})
App.render('div-id')
});
The App panel can then have it's own layout manager.
This might be useful if you're familiar with jQuery, but not yet familiar with YUI 3 syntax: http://www.jsrosettastone.com/
Each of the libs you listed is excellent. When embarking on a larger scale project, the quality of a lib's documentation, community, and commitment to support become more relevant.
With Dojo, keep in mind that outside of dojo base, it only ever loads what you tell it to. But yes, without a built layer, that means it could easily end up requesting 50 JS files at startup for a large application using a bunch of widgets.
There are several pages in the reference guide documenting the build script: http://www.dojotoolkit.org/reference-guide/build/index.html
Rebecca Murphey wrote a nice blog post outlining an example app and build profile that you might find illuminative: http://blog.rebeccamurphey.com/scaffolding-a-buildable-dojo-application
If you get stuck, there's likely to be people in the Dojo IRC channel that can help.
RE ExtJS: I'm not sure what your exact situation is, but keep in mind that if you're intending to use it in commercial non-open-source software, you need to pay for licenses: http://www.sencha.com/store/js/
I'm a little curious as to why you think the size / number of requests is specifically an issue with Dojo though. I haven't used the others, but I'd expect it to be somewhat of a potential concern with any of them.
Looking back at an internal system I just built, the common server / page model with minor use of Ajax for some UI components. I'm not sure if I'm satisfy with the end result because it seems like we spent too much time on the frontend. Not a big fan of going through all the trouble for styling and making sure the CSS works right.
So I started thinking, are there better tools for the frontend?
How do Flex and ExtJS compare? maybe in these areas?
learning curve
functionality
layout (without maintaining CSS)
ease of implementation
testability (TDD in Javascript vs in Actionscript?)
performance
maintainability
Please do not close this, I'm just asking for feedback from ppl experienced in Flex, ExtJS or both.
Thanks all!
I will start with my executive summary:
If I had to choose right now, I would go with Flex. Databinding and server communication are extremely easy, intuitive, and quick to set up. You'll find that if you're doing a lot of layout and the View of MVC-style frameworks, that Flex is probably going to get you set up more quickly, and it'll be easier to read.
Comparing Markup
Flex focuses a lot on MXML, which is the markup language. It's going to be brand new for most of your developers, so if they already know HTML/JavaScript/CSS, this might be a point off. The strength of Flex lies in that it's not limited like HTML. If you want a property, or a databinding, you can do it directly on a tag. Maybe not always best practice for everything, but you can.
ExtJS takes the approach of augmenting standard markup with JavaScript, so while your HTML certainly needs to be done well, it's really the JavaScript shining through, doing the work.
Components/Functionality
Flex is better at data handling. It uses E4X, which is an inline XML querying language that uses dot syntax. BookCase.Books.Book[#id=43].#title, for example.
ExtJS also does databinding, but it's more verbose, and not dead simple like Flex.
Flex has a lot of really nice built-in components for layout modeling, input, and charts. They're easy to use, have a common styling interface (generally), and can have custom styling and a subset of CSS, plus some proprietary extensions. ExtJS uses standard CSS markup, rather than just a subset.
ExtJS has more plugins and components than Flex, and the Menu control is far more customizable and looks better. Default styling is also a bit prettier in ExtJS.
Layout Engine
Flex wins this one hands down, in my opinion. If you want a column layout, you can either do a grid or a flow layout to achieve it, and in about 4 lines of MXML. The same in Ext requires a Javascript object to be passed through a layout class. IMO, it's more difficult to work with practically.
Implementation
Both systems are easy to deploy and maintain. Copy files, and both will work if you are doing continuous integration.
Testability
You can use jsUnit for ExtJS, and FlexUnit for Actionscript. How easy this testability is to manage depends entirely on your control of development style. Both frameworks will lead to a mix of UI with test-worthy code, with ExtJS requiring more separation by default.
If you set it up right, there is no clear advantage here.
Performance
Internet Explorer on Windows has the best Flash performance, sadly enough. If you are using a Mac, you may see slowness during initial plugin loading. Flex in production needs to be running a production release, and you need to be running the production Flash player, rather than the debug version. In our environment, production release + production Flash Player reduced the initial loadup by 4-6 seconds, so make sure you compare apples.
Animations will be faster in Flash, but honestly you're not really going to see a whole lot of a performance issue unless you're doing heavy data processing. If this application has a lot of animated charts, sliding animations, and things of that nature, you should go with Flash. That's what it's built for and it's good at it. If you're just going to be hiding and showing portions of the screen, and maybe doing basic animation, ExtJS will win.
Maintainability
Both have the serious potential to become monsters. Flex will be a monster if everyone codes everything in MXML and never writes scripts or external CSS. ExtJS will be a monster if you overarchitect how to handle the data and the layout managers.
The good news is that both can be successfully maintained in a developer friendly way, and both can fit into a continuous integration process, start to finish.
Hope this helps.
I agree with Jordan about the architecture and maintainability superiority of Flex over ExtJs, however, having developed large systems in both I will say this as conclusively as I agree with Jordan:
that Flex as a front end is much slower than ExtJs. Generally once the data is received by the Flex front end, rendering it into, say a grid, is much slower than doing the exact same thing with ExtJs. Also, screen updates in Flex have that problem that Java applets have - grey areas that aren't refreshed that quickly. The user experience is much better than ExtJs, particularly if your data sets become large. Flex just does not perform quickly, no matter what browser you use.
The rendering in Flex is also not as razor sharp as it is in ExtJs. Look at the widgets and the text, and compare them side by side and you will see what I mean.
So in summary while development in Flex is superior to ExtJs, the user experience is the opposite and ExtJs wins there.
Just FYI, for anyone stumbling onto this question as of late 2012, since Flex was open sourced by Adobe earlier this year (read: "abandoned") you should strongly consider whether or not it's the best choice for new development at this point. In fact, in Adobe's own words:
In the long-term, we believe HTML5 will be the best technology for
enterprise application development.
While there are of course many HTML5 frameworks available, Ext is actually a nice transition for Flex developers (so I've been told, I've never used Flex myself). The component model, UI widgets, layout concepts and general development styles are fairly similar, and Flex developers I've worked with have tended to catch on to Ext concepts quite readily.
I am going to start a new application which mainly consist NavigationPane, Grid, Toolbar. Layout should look like this demo page http://www.gwt-ext.com/demo/
I am quite confused which one to use in terms of writing less code, more performant, etc..
Could someone tell the pros and cons of all these technologies.
All the while I coded in javascript, so that way ExtJs seems to be the easy one for me to code. But I am curios to try GWT Ext, Is it true that it could do a lot just by writing few lines of java code.
For eg: To achieve the layout ( given in above gwt ext demo url), which one should I opt ExtJs or GWT Ext.
I read SmartGWT is relatively slower than GwtEXT. Does it have any advantage over GWT EXT. I am also looking for hibernate based data modules ( as my application is going to have many database calls). Anyone of SmartGWT or GWTExt has support for such modules. I came to know that smartgwt doesn't offer all of smartclient enterprise version functionalities, that we are allowed only a few of smartclient features. Will it be an issue?
Your response is highly appreciated.
The GWT-Ext main page now says
"GWT-Ext is no longer under active development and has been superseded by Smart GWT. Assistance will be provided to existing users of GWT-Ext looking to migrate to Smart GWT."
so why would anyone use it?
To write the least code, use SmartGWT Pro. It provides a wizard that allows you to just pick from a list of Hibernate entities you've created, and instantly you have the ability to perform all CRUD operations on that entity, no code required. Then you can add business logic.
The wizard:
http://www.smartclient.com/smartgwtee/showcase/#tools_hibernate_wizard
The link about is just screenshots, but there are several Hibernate samples in the showcase. See especially the Master-Detail Batch Load and Save sample.
As far as performance, real-world performance of most enterprise apps is dictated by how often the application has to contact the server. In this area SmartGWT has a large lead because of features like Adaptive Filtering (see the Featured area in the SmartGWT showcase).
Almost all reports we receive of SmartGWT being "slow" are due to having Firebug enabled. Disable Firebug and performance is fine, so normal end users will never perceive slowness.
About 6 months ago, we studied whether we would use ExtJS or GWT-Ext for an internal application. We wanted the back-end to be J2EE standard frameworks (struts, spring, hibernate for persistence, etc.). We ended up choosing ExtJS because it seemed to us that GWT was not stable enough (too many changes in the API that is still recent), and Ext-GWT was always lagging behind in development.
application which mainly consist NavigationPane, Grid, Toolbar.
Well, this tells us a lot about your app, doesn't it :)
I think it comes down to how good you are at either Java or JavaScript. They are quite a different languages you know :) But if you are well-versed at both but only used Ext JS, then picking up Ext GWT (or GWT Ext, if you meant that), shouldn't be such a great deal. And if that application you are planning is going to be as simple and small as your description of it, then it's probably a perfect opportunity to try out something new.
I use GWT-Ext and it is quite good especially if you don't mind tweaking things with JSNI to customize the already existing Ext widgets it is incredibly powerful. Unfortunately development is stagnant, so my future projects will probably be either in SmartGWT or Ext-GWT. SmartGWT is written by Sanjiv Jivan (same guy who wrote GWT-Ext) and it has most of the widgets we need. I must say most of the skins are quite dated except the Enterprise skin which looks good, but you can always roll your own skin.