If php and ruby are languages, and cake and rails are frameworks, how do CMS like drupal and joomla fit into the scheme... can you use them in any language and any framework?
CMS: Content Management System.
Hence they are systems. A system is a finished product.
The purpose of a CMS is simple: the end-user can do something with it, in this case managing content of a website.
The systems you mentioned, Drupal and Joomla, are extensible: they have an architecture that allow plugins to extend functionality. Still, they are products.
Frameworks, on the other hand, are not finished products. They do have an architecture (the framework architecture). They also allow plugins to extend functionality. The difference, however, is that a framework itself is not a product, and cannot be used by the end-user.
Related
This is a part of my course project.
Basically, there are vendors which provide food and at peak hours the queue gets so large that people have to wait long for their order.
Our project is like an online site which will enable users to order food. After ordering the food, the user will get an info as to where does he lie in the queue. This way students can order from their hostel rooms without actually going to the vendor and getting their time wasted by waiting in the line. As soon as the user orders the food, vendor gets notified of the project so that he can start preparing the food.
I am completely new to web development so I am not sure what to use. This project will also work as an exercise to learn about web development.
I have heard about Drupal & Joomla CMS. Also, Django framework is also there and I am actually confused as to what technology to use.
I am also confused as to what is the difference between a framework and a CMS? How do they differ and which one will suit me.
So, how do I go about developing the
application?
A framework is a basic application without any concrete business logic. It contains basic structure and sometimes basic features (like database connectivity and other standard libraries). You have to write your code yourself.
A CMS is a content management system. It is essentially a complete website but without the content. it provides tools to write content (web pages). The most popular ones (like Joomla) come with a bunch of templates too that you can download to give your site any look you want.
A CMS probably doesn't have enough features to provide you with this logic. You will probably need to do some programming to get this done. It may still be useful to use a CMS, though. Lots of them support various plugins that allow you to add these kind of features and still allow you to easily edit regular pages.
Frameworks are libraries turned on their heads. You plug a library into your code; a framework turns this around by abstracting a particular problem in such a way that you plug your code into it to solve a problem. It's the Hollywood principle: "Don't call us; we'll call you."
People who write frameworks have deep knowledge of a particular problem domain. They usually represent the distillation of several attempts to solve a problem, with best practices, clear abstractions, and good plug-in points made clear from long experience.
Django is a Python framework for web applications that have a browser front end and relational databases for persistence.
That's one example of a framework.
A CMS (Content Management System) allows users to dynamically add and manage content in a web application. I think they solve slightly different problems from Django, because it is specialized to the problem of content management.
I'd recommend starting your queuing problem without a front end at all - just text. Concentrate on the subtleties of queuing. Get that right with your object model and then expose a user interface to display it to users.
CMS is a 'content management system'. If provides modules that you can plug in. The end effect is it sets up a website for you, and you have admin pages where you can enter content. For special stuff, you use plugins. If you have to, you can write your own plugins.
A development framework is just a stack of technologies you can use to develop an application. So for example, the Grails framework uses Hibernate(persistence) and Spring(dependency injection and other stuff) under the covers -- it is providing and using existing tools (which are themselves frameworks) which you will in turn use to build the application.
With a framework, you basically start with a bunch of tools in your toolbox, but little or no parts of a running web app out of the box. You have to develop the functionality with the tools. With a CMS system, it's like they have implemented something for you, but it is really generic and you will have to tailor it to your needs.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicates:
What is a framework? What does it do? Why do we need a framework
What is the difference between a class library and a framework
Although I referred to various sources, I still can't understand the proper definition. What is meant by "application framework"?
Here's a simpler answer:
Application frameworks make writing applications easier.
Creating applications is hard. Applications have to provide input and output which they get through operating system semantics. Modern applications are usually GUI based and a GUI app is orders of magnitude more complex than a non-GUI app.
It's that simple. The framework takes all the complexities of interfacing with the operating system and simplifies them for you. It handles all the nitty-gritty details for you. Obviously certain frameworks do a better job at it than others.
There is one drawback to using an application framework that rarely seems to be discussed (presumably because we are all smiling about the amount of work we didn't have to do). In order to provide a simplified view of the operating environment, a framework has to box you into a certain 'style'. If your app is sufficiently different from the usual form of app, you are likely to end up frustrated in the framework as it will make doing what you want very difficult. This is partly because you now have to do all the things that the framework was hiding from you and partly because the framework is probably a closed system.
Frameworks are a special case of software libraries in that they are
reusable abstractions of code wrapped
in a well-defined Application
programming interface (API), yet they
contain some key distinguishing
features that separate them from
normal libraries.
An application framework consists of a framework used by software developers to implement the standard structure of an application for a specific development environment
Wikipedia answers, as you might expect, that an application framework is a framework for developing applications.
An application typically provides a user interface. "Application framework" can be used loosely to refer to user-interface frameworks that provide little more than a collection of low-level user-interface controls -- like MFC, Swing, Qt and the like.
However, it is useful to distinguish these from more powerful frameworks like the Eclipse Rich-Client Platform and the Netbeans Platform, which provide a higher-level framework -- built atop those low-level toolkits -- on which to develop applications.
I personally use "application platform" only for these latter platforms, and refer to the low-level APIs as "user-interface toolkits."
At the moment Iam evaluating java web frameworks. More precisely Iam talking about GWT, JSF2 and apache wicket. One very importent criteria in this evaluation is prototyping.
The prototyping process in my company can be described by the folloing:
The customer can produce GUIs with an easy to use WYSIWYG editor, by drag&drop-ing web components on the corporate predefined website structur. There is also a need for some litte dynamic being like navigation from one frame to another.
So Iam looking for tools. These tools should not only provide nice GUIs but also deliver
some basic code, which can be forwarded to the development. The aim is to avoid missunderstandings between designers and developers as much as possible. More or less the
developers just have to implements the code, but not to implement the optical requirements.
In addition it would be desirable to customize the components thats been used in the WYSIWYG editor. Does anyone know any good tools for the mentioned frameworks (GWT, JSF2, wicket)?
One of the challenges with WYSIWYG tools for UI is that you generally have to pick between rapid prototyping and maintainable code. Even then, as soon as you want to do something that's not supported by the prototyping tool, you can implement it as you would without the prototyping tool, but your round-trip functionality (namely turning your app back into something that can be edited) is broken or crippled unless extra work is done to generate the metadata that the editor needs.
Upgrading between major releases is another issue. Vendors and groups who have developed these tools have a historically spotty record of when they stop supporting older versions, reasonably because of limited resources and sometimes difficult problems with how to track solid innovation happening in the framework itself.
My suggestion instead is to prototype with an RIA prototyping tool like Balsamiq Mockups or use a grid system like 960 Grid to generate rapid prototypes, then use a web development framework that allows your developers to run the code with or without the backend server. Wicket has a tag called that is great for this kind of thing -- web devs can fill a div with stuff that a component should generate, and Wicket devs can wrap the contents of that tag with after they implement it. Both parties can coexist for a long time that way.
Try GWT Designer for GWT.
Introduction
Quick Start Guide
Download
There's nothing like this for Wicket that I know of. The closest you would get to any kind of resource reuse from your customer would be to give them a drag and drop HTML editor - the resulting HTML could then form the basis of Wicket page/panel layout.
if you are planing to use a javascript library, you may use extjs,
http://www.sencha.com/products/js/
they have developed a nice designer
www.sencha.com/products/designer/
there is also a port of ext in GWT
www.sencha.com/products/gwt/
You have to pay for a commercial license if your application isn't open source!
I am looking to develop a multi-user web application that supports the following key features:
fill out forms with demographic data on individuals
define and administer surveys & polls
generate nice reports with graphs)
user rights administration and generic login stuff
My dilemma is whether to use a CMS (Drupal?) or develop from scratch.
Putting the time and cost issues aside for a minute, which are an obvious CMS strength, what are the weaknesses and potential risks using a CMS? my gut tells me that a CMS will be very easy and quick to start with, but when the features list begins to grow - I will pay the bill with having to delve into unfamiliar DB structure and code, try to tweak existing modules or write my own from scratch.
Is it really better, over the long run, to use a CMS?
There are two basic types of CMSes:
focused on features
focused on flexibility
The first type - focused on features - usually offer lot of modules or extensions to expand the basic functionality. You can build your web site very quickly using ready-to-use third party modules. There's a disadvantage of this way - it isn't so easy to bend or customize these modules. Usually you need to rewrite them.
Drupal. WordPress and Joomla are good examples of the first type of CMSes.
The second type - focused on flexibility - somewhere called Content Management Frameworks - don't offer so much prefabricated modules, but offer much more tools and ways to make your structure and relationships between elements fit your needs. It takes more time to learn this kind of CMS or to build your fist web site, but you can easily customize anything you need.
Some examples of the second type CMSes: SilverStripe, Symphony CMS, appRain, MODx, ezPublish.
appRain is one of the best customizable option where you will get both option of CMS and also complex coding by it's framework.
Development process is also easy. New version 4.0.4 is on they way to be released.
I've been having an agruement with a friend that Mason (Perl) is not a framework, but a templating language. I feel Mason for Perl does what JSP does for Java (as an analogy, not pure technical comparison). From what I know, JSP is not a framework and I feel neither is Mason. When I looked up wikipedia Mason (Perl), I see that the main site says it is a web application framework written in Perl while the discussion page contests it.
Any pointers on why it is/ it is not a framework?
Update based on comments from ysth:
For a framework, I feel it should at least make db access easy, manage sessions, basic security that a webapp would need, templating and code reuse (or libraries that make basic tasks easy).
Mason is an 'M' short of being a MVC (Model-View-Controller) framework. It provides extensive rendering (View) features, which is why people think of Mason as being a templating language. However it also provides quite a few dispatch mechanisms (epsecially in the form of dhandlers), and control mechanisms (which fit naturally into autohandlers).
A few years ago I wrote an on-line tutorial (in Mason) to show off some of these features. It's optimised for full-screen display, and needs javascript enabled.
What Mason doesn't give you is a database abstraction layer, so you have to bring your own Model.
To the best of my knowledge amazon.com is written in Mason, along with many other sites.
If you enjoy working with Mason, but you'd like to have a Model, more toys, and a pony, then you may consider looking at Jifty as a web application framework.
A templating system would be something like HTML::Template, that is, a module that only does templating.
I feel that Mason does more, it has somehow a routing mechanism, it provides argument handling though %ARGS, intialisations through %INIT.
It also provides interfaces to mod_perl, CGI...
Now, it does not talk to the database, as if you want a clean way to do it, you'll have to use Class::DBI, DBIx::Perlish or one of the other hundred perl modules that does object mapping, or whatever else...
It is not an Model-View-Controller type of framework, it is probably closer to PHP than Ruby on Rails for example (and just as bad from what I have seen of it).
Can't answer the question to whether HTML::Mason is or isn't a framework without looking at it but I'm always happy with the following definition....
"a framework calls your program whereas your program calls a library"
Looking at Embedded Perl in HTML with Mason view of its competition, I'd say it is a template language. Otherwise Catalyst and Maypole would be on the list. Also, I think I read somewhere that you can use Mason as the View portion in a Catalyst application.
I guess I can see where you can use it like a framework, but it seems to be more complete if you view it as a template language.
Mason alone is not a framework it's just a template system BUT with some very cool features. It's got it's own structure and you can embed perl code very easely in it also it's got cache support. I've seen people who use Mason alone for developing a large application, but I guess it works better in an MVC framework.
Take care!
The following definition of a framework is taken from the Gamma book on Design Patterns. "A framework is a set of cooperating classes that make up a reusable design for a specific class of software." Mason, by that definition, is a framework. An MVC framework is only one type of framework.
HTML::Mason is what frameworks want to become when they get older. With HTML::Mason you get:
a dispatcher
templating
caching
logging
extremely flexible modularization
It was designed for high performance multi-tiered web applications, not for pleasing the fans of design patterns borrowed from desktop programming (such as MVC was).
Depends of your definition of framework.
You can apply name framework to any library if it does more than one thing.