This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Computing:Software This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcomputers,computing, andinformation technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byWikiProject Software.

I don't think that a merger is appropriate. "Model 2" describes a design philosophy for WebApps. It is not necessarily linked to a certain view technology (JSP). You can (in theory) create a model 2 application while using another technology like Velocity as well (there are many very good MVC / Model 2 frameworks, so I wouldn't call this approach pratical).AnimalFriend09:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it should not be merged. (Model 1) is not really used any more, the name (Model 1) and (Model 2) has only historical significance. May be the page title could be changed to 'Model 2 Request Handling(Web)'.Ervinn14:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page is misleading. MVC model 2 is a pattern. This page makes it sound like its specific to Java at best or JSP at worst. I suggest this page is removed and model1 and model2 explained briefly under model-view-controllerNickHollingsworth (talk)16:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add a "criticism" section for completeness, but I need help.

A common criticism of Model 2 is that even in an MVC context, it does not truly achieve the MVC paradigm. The reason commonly stated is that eventing is missing in Model 2. i.e. If the model is updated, there is no event generated to let the page know to re-render. The software must wait for the user to refresh the page, thus polling the model for updates.

While I have heard this criticism many times, I cannot find a suitable reference for the article. Does anyone have at least a blog entry or a published article that makes this criticism? Please keep in mind that forum posts are a non-starter.

If you know of any other supportable criticisms, please add them to the article.

Thanks in advance!Jbanes (talk)05:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress onTalk:Model 1 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot16:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress onTalk:JSP model 1 architecture which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot21:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• All unassessed articles
• Unassessed Computing articles
• Unknown-importance Computing articles
• Unassessed software articles
• Unknown-importance software articles
• Unassessed software articles of Unknown-importance
• All Software articles
• All Computing articles