|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ABSTRACT
Web applications have many more model objects exposed on the backend, or admin side, than they do on the front, or public side. Coding interfaces for all those models is redundant and a waste of resources when all that is needed is Search, Sort, Pagination, (support for) Association and CRUD. Implementing these interfaces can often require more programming time than the public side of an application. We will analyze an application that was developed using Ruby on Rails (or Rails) [1] and ActiveScaffold [2]. We will compare a subset of the ActiveScaffold portion of this application with an example created using Java and MyFaces Tomahawk [3]. ActiveScaffold and MyFaces Tomahawk are open source software (OSS). Our results will show that ActiveScaffold has a greater number of features and is more reusable than MyFaces Tomahawk. This information is useful to web developers responsible for creating the admin interfaces of web applications. REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
INDEX TERMS
Primary Classification:
Additional Classification:
General Terms:
Keywords:
Collaborative Colleagues:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||