Abstract
JSR-314 (JavaServer Faces 2.0) has passed its final approval ballot. The JSF 2.0 Expert Group standardized some of the best features and innovations from open source projects like Facelets, Seam and Ajax4jsf. The recent version of JSF improves a lot of things which JSF 1.2 didn't get right. Some examples are configuration, composite components, GET support, navigation, etc.

The Apache Tapestry web framework has been making a name for itself in terms of innovative features and ease of use. Tapestry 5 features concise templates, minimal amounts of Java code, high performance, and important productivity features such as live class reloading. Despite the fact that there is a similarity between JSF 2 and Tapestry 5, their implementation is quite different.

In this session, I'll make a head-to-head comparison of JSF 2.0 and Tapestry 5. I'm going to show the strength and weakness of both frameworks. Even though the speaker is biased (he is Apache Tapestry Committer), the comparison is going to be fair. I'll rate the two projects on critical aspects of their design, learning curve, easiness of use and productivity.

Abstract
JSR-314 (JavaServer Faces 2.0) has passed its final approval ballot. The JSF 2.0 Expert Group standardized some of the best features and innovations from open source projects like Facelets, Seam and Ajax4jsf. The recent version of JSF improves a lot of things which JSF 1.2 didn't get right. Some examples are configuration, composite components, GET support, navigation, etc.

The Apache Tapestry web framework has been making a name for itself in terms of innovative features and ease of use. Tapestry 5 features concise templates, minimal amounts of Java code, high performance, and important productivity features such as live class reloading. Despite the fact that there is a similarity between JSF 2 and Tapestry 5, their implementation is quite different.

In this session, I'll make a head-to-head comparison of JSF 2.0 and Tapestry 5. I'm going to show the strength and weakness of both frameworks. Even though the speaker is biased (he is Apache Tapestry Committer), the comparison is going to be fair. I'll rate the two projects on critical aspects of their design, learning curve, easiness of use and productivity.