Talk:Java Platform

Java pages cleanup

Given the recent change in the Java naming conventions [1], the Java articles will need a cleanup, possibly including moves in a few cases and redirects put in the place of their current names. Sorry, I wasn't sure where to add this in the form of something like a VFD (and couldn't find it in the FAQ), so I figured here would be as good a start as any. aidan_walsh

The great thing about Java is that you can run programs in a web browser directly off the web without having to trust the people who wrote the software. This makes it ideally suited for providing examples, and yet these do not seem to be readily available yet. So, to get things moving, here is an example application which allows editing and publishing of full frame rate video over the web: FORscene.

Disambiguation with Javascript

Shouldn't there be a disambig statement at the top of the article for javascript? The javascript page mentions the differences in its first section. As a layman, it is pretty confusing to me since as I understand it, browsers can use both. Spalding 13:50, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

There is already a disambiguation at the top of Java programming language. I don't think there's need for one here. – Smyth\^talk 15:10, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it's even worse than I thought then. I got to the page from a link using the word Java, so I didn't even notice this article is about a Java platform as opposed to the Java language. I now think the remedy is to put a wikilink to Java much higher up in the article than it currently is, so I will do that now. Spalding 20:58, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Merge from Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition

The sections in the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition article that list and summarize the packages are better served by the Javadoc API documentation and should be removed. (Compare Java SE 24 API Javadocs to the list of packages in the article—the article is nearly a complete subset.) Once these are removed, there is very little left in the J2SE article.

The only really relevant thing that needs to be discussed regarding the platform is to describe the distinction between the platform and the language and explain what constitutes the platform, and that is well-discussed in this article. Therefore, this is less of a merge request (although some changes are probably necessary in this document) than a delete request for Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition. This same logic probably also applies to the Java 2 Platform, Micro Edition and Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition pages, although there would be more content to merge into this article in those cases. I think all of the platform distinctions would be better discussed as sections in a single article. – Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 19:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep separate. I'm not so sure I agree. It seems to me that each platform is sufficiently important to merit its own article, even if at first labeled a stub. Maybe we could highlight important packages and their common uses, etc. In the Enterprise Edition article, we could talk about it being a framework/specification rather than an implementation. We could link to articles about servers and distributed architecture (maybe summarize them in the article with a link to the main article). These are just a couple of ideas. Just because each article isn't up to its potential doesn't mean it should be merged. - ElAmericano | talk 05:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed merge suggestion Since this generated almost no discussion in about a month, I removed the merge request, for now. – Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 10:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]