Usually you compare a framework against a fixed point of reference, not really against each other. Here, two frameworks are only compared to each other using the following criteria.
They are scored by distributing the points value for each criteria under “scoring” between the two frameworks. For example,
for a – Framework 1 could get 7 points, Framework 2 would then get 11 points, adding up to 18 points. If there’s no difference between the two frameworks for a criteria, each splits the points. One criteria has an odd numbered total of points, to avoid an overtime situation.
For the last two criteria, the frameworks either get 1 point or 4 points, on whether they meet the criteria or not.
The points are added up at the end, and the winner advances.
Criteria
View - templated preferred, DOM, XHTML,
JSPs not as preferred
score: 1 - 18
AJAX support - basic support on pages for
widgets and dynamic updates of
sections
score: 1 - 7
Documentation - adequate reference, examples,
tutorials
score: 1 - 18
Backward compatibility - do new
versions cause upgrade woes?
score: 1 - 6
Support (maintenance of project,
forums), somewhat biased toward usage
score: 1 - 18
Database integration - full stack, ORM
capabilities built in, or
recommended 3rd party framework
score: 1 - 12
Integration with rest of app
stack - Spring or POJOs for biz logic
score: 1 - 12
Internationalization (I18N) support
- message bundles
score; 1 - 6
How complex is it (more subjective
than other criteria) how many "layers".
how easy does it seem to be to learn?
score: 1 - 18
Abstraction - how well does it "hide"
the HTTP request/response model
score: 1 - 6
Separation of concerns
(MVC, MC-V, Page/C)
score: 1 - 12
Can do file upload with framework
native capability
score: 1 or 4
Can plug in SSO
score: 1 or 4
April 21, 2008 at 11:27 pm
[...] Scoring rules [...]