Mark Schiefelbein >> Jonas suggests that you can avoid legacy by focusing on JavaServer Faces (JSF), and that is exactly what the Backbase Java Edition does. An application developer who uses Backbase does not have to be aware of the specifics of the client-side Ajax engine and can just use the JSF UI Components, which work according to the JSF standard.

"Avoid legacy by focusing on JavaServer Faces (JSF)..."

However, we have customers who cannot move to JSF today, usually because they need to continue supporting a legacy application. For those customers we are offering a client-only Ajax solution that works with any server-side technology. In addition, this autumn we will launch a Struts edition, which provides an easy way to add Ajax features to the large number of active Struts projects.

IndicThreads >> As you would know, the Java world is obsessed with standards. is Backbase working on standardization of any of the technologies involved?

Mark Schiefelbein >> Yes, we are working on a number of initiatives. First of all, we are a member of the OpenAjax initiative, which aims to provide standardized tooling for Ajax development, primarily based on Eclipse. Our development tools are already based on Eclipse and WTP and we expect that the OpenAjax initiative will drive further standardization.

"OpenAjax initiative aims to provide standardized tooling for Ajax development..."

Secondly, we are using existing standards where possible. Most prominently this is JavaServer Faces, which is at the core of our Java Edition. On the client-side we make extensive use of XML, XPath and XSLT, and of course JavaScript.

For developers it would be great to have a single standardized UI definition language. That's why we are closely following all initiatives to create such a language and are directly involved in some of them, including the OpenAjax Initiative markup subcommittee.

IndicThreads >> There are so many Ajax frameworks out there that it's quite difficult to understand how one differs from another. Are Dojo, Backbase, Google Web Toolkit, DWR, etc. directly competing with each other or does each have its own space / category?

Mark Schiefelbein >> Ray Valdes of Gartner has created a frequently used classification of Ajax frameworks in an article on application development trends. He lists four levels of Ajax support:

• Snippet level

• Widget level

• Framework level

• Enhanced Framework level

DWR focuses solely on remoting of function calls and hence falls into the snippet level category. Several UI Component vendors focus on providing individual widgets to ajaxify existing web interfaces. Those are examples of the widget level category. To reach framework level a toolkit needs to provide an integrated Ajax Engine, with - for example - a common browser compatibility layer. Dojo is an example of this. Backbase and GWT are examples of the enhanced framework level as they also provide server-side integration and tool support.

DWR - Snippet Level
UI Components - Widget Level
Dojo - Framework Level
Backbase and GWT - Enhanced Framework level

While today there are many, many Ajax offerings, very few provide the functionality and maturity required to build and maintain Ajax interfaces for business-critical applications, like Backbase does.