Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>The division of work into two teams (designer and backend) does not currently reflect the division of the software into two components. This means that both teams are too influenced by each other's work. I can see three ways to go about this.</p> <p><strong>Adapting the application architecture to match the teams</strong></p> <p>You could try and change the architecture of your application, splitting it into two components more aligned with the two teams. This is where you're heading, from the sound of your questions. </p> <p>This is most succesful for the development of MVVM applications. In the .Net world, designers create Views using XAML markup language and the Expression Blend tool and the developers create the Models ViewModels that bind to the XAML view. Same for knockout.js MVVM applications.</p> <p>JSPs are not fit for this purpose, but using <a href="http://www.thymeleaf.org/" rel="nofollow">Thymeleaf</a> sounds extremely attractive to me if you are heading this way. Its templates are valid xhtml pages. Or maybe you can put a REST interface on the web server, move the binding of objects to javascript and do MVVM using knockout.js.</p> <p><strong>Adapting the teams to match the application architecture</strong></p> <p>You could change the composition of the teams. Merge them into one team or if that's too many people, create two teams consisting of both designers and backend developers and have them work on different feature sets. This way you can achieve more interaction between the developers and designers. Have more moments where a developer and a designer sit behind one screen together making changes to the JSPs. Have developer and designer discuss the changes for each feature and figure out a handy way to divide those changes on a feature by feature basis.</p> <p><strong>Keep both teams and architecture as they are, formalize the handover</strong> Let the designers produce HTML + CSS and let the developers incorporate these artifacts into the code. A nice and clean cutoff point that requires little change to the teams and the software.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload