---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thomas Spiegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sep 28, 2005 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: MYFACES-152: ResponseWriter.endDocument() abuse breaks
ADF Faces and Facelets
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
int flags = Pattern.CASE_INSENSITIVE | Pattern.DOTALL;
Pattern pattern = Pattern.compile("< * / *head *>", flags);
would even find < / head >
regards,
Thomas
On 9/28/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, good.
>
> As of today, it is easy to break the ExtensionFilter - I just need to
> change from
>
> <head to < head
>
> and it won't work anymore, right?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 9/27/05, Thomas Spiegl < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > IMHO parsing the markup and inserting the necessary scripts would not have a
> > great impact on performance. Doing the search with regular expressions is
> > really fast.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Indeed, it could be generated them in t:head/body. But then we would have
> > to set a request attribute, and in the filter, fallback on parsing the input
> > if the request attribute hasn't been set.
> > > So, to be compatible with pages without the t:head/body, we would have to
> > do the code in the filter anyway.
> > >
> > > This code to parse the input isn't too hard. Some very good tools like
> > SiteMesh work like this and are very reliable & fast, so I don't see that as
> > a problem.
> > > So, in the end, I'm not sure those t:head & t:body tags are really useful
> > to solve this problem.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 17:07 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > We could move the script generation from endDocument to encodeEnd in
> > > t:head or t:body - tag...
> > >
> > > With that we make sure that no scripts are outputted after the
> > >
> > > document has already been closed!
> > >
> > > Manfred suggests as a solution to parse the input for head - or body
> > > tags, I don't like having to parse the whole output for these strings
> > >
> > > - there are just too many possibilities. With a clearly defined call
> > > to startElement, we know the position!
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > wrote:
> > > > I think it does.
> > > > So, basically, a phase listener would start the filter's job if the
> > filter
> > > > hasn't been configured. Right ?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not 100% sure how it solves MYFACES-152 though.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 16:08 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > > Well, any HTML before the JSF components would just be rendered out -
> > > > untouched!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > As soon as the JSF processing starts, we start caching the response.
> > > > When the t:body element is closed, we write out the cached data.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Our existing filter might work unchanged, if I don't have any problems
> > > > in my reasoning...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Sounds reasonable?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 15:55 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > > > Yes, but ideally we would find a way to integrate it into the
> > >
> > > > > life-cycle - not having a separate filter, with this we could
> > > > > "remember" the insert position.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Not having a separate filter would be good, but I don't know how this
> > can
> > > > > be done, as any HTML rendered before the JSF components would be lost.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wait a minute - we could set the insert position by setting request
> > >
> > > > > parameters which the filter reads, right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure !
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > So, If I understand you well, the t:head for example would render
> > > > > something
> > >
> > > > > > like :
> > > > > > <head><!-- Hello, I'm the tomahawk head Start -->
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > <!-- Hello, I'm the tomahawk head End --></head>
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And the extensions filter would first search for the "<!-- Hello,
> > I'm
> > > > the
> > >
> > > > > > tomahawk head Start -->" to get the insert position.
> > > > > > If he doesn't find it, it would fallback on the current parsing.
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is that it ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 15:40 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > Basically, it would work very much like the approach we are using
> > today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So we would need to do some caching of the response, and parsing in
> > >
> > > > > > the statements as we go. We would have defined markers, though, and
> > > > > > wouldn't need to search through the whole markup!
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We are doing this today for the rendering of the javascript for
> > > > > > commandLinks...
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we don't find a way to fix this problem, we won't be able to use
> > > > > > the ADF components with MyFaces apps, nor will facelets be properly
> > >
> > > > > > working.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > What do you mean by "he just won't have the extras" ?
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > I think that if it's fully optional, it sure would bey good.
> > > > > > > I mean if the page has t:head & t:body, then it uses it, otherwise
> > it
> > >
> > > > > > works
> > > > > > > as today.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But if the t:head & t:body are mandatory, then this is a problem.
> > >
> > > > > > > About the RI, I meant that if an application is made to work with
> > the
> > > > > RI,
> > > > > > > and then the user switches to MyFaces to use just a few components
> > he
> > >
> > > > > > needs,
> > > > > > > he should not have to redesign his pages.
> > > > > > > Right now, in such a case you just setup the extensions filter, an
> > add
> > >
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > MyFaces' tag where you want it.
> > > > > > > If you also had to redesign your pages to have a t:head & t:body,
> > it
> > >
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > be quite a penalty for MyFaces switchers.
> > > > > > > That's what I meant by "you could not include just a t:component
> > in a
> > >
> > > > > page
> > > > > > > that would otherwise for fine with the RI".
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > I was also wondering how this can be done.
> > > > > > > If you are rendering an inputSuggestAjax for example, you'll need
> > to
> > > > > > > include the js in the head.
> > >
> > > > > > > But the t:head should already be rendered.
> > > > > > > So I don't know how you're going to change a component that's
> > already
> > >
> > > > > > > rendered.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I once looked at something similar for the fileUpload, to add
> > >
> > > > > > automatically
> > > > > > > the proper encrypt method to the form, but I didn't find any good
> > > > > solution
> > >
> > > > > > > that wouldn't work as the extension filter ( i.e. by parsing the
> > > > > generated
> > > > > > > HTML).
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sylvain.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 14:53 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > > > > > I was waiting for your feedback here, Sylvain ;)
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know this is problematic, for the reasons you pointed out. As
> > things
> > > > > > > like addResource and the scroll-position javascript are special
> > >
> > > > > > > MyFaces functionality anyways, the user won't have the special
> > > > > > > features anyways with using the RI, so no change here.
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With using MyFaces, he won't get the functionality if he doesn't
> > use
> > > > > > > t:head or t:body. It will still work, he just won't have the
> > extras.
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hello Martin,
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm not sure I understand this.
> > > > > > > > Would you require every page having a t:component to have t:head
> > &
> > >
> > > > > > t:body
> > > > > > > > components as well ?
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > If this is the case, it would be a lead to a lot ot other
> > problems I
> > > > > > > think.
> > > > > > > > For example, it would break old pages. Also, you could not
> > include
> > >
> > > > > just
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > t:component in a page that would otherwise for fine with the RI.
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sylvain.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 12:33 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > There is a long standing bug MYFACES-152
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-152
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > which needs our attention, for facelets and ADF faces
> > compatibility.
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you say to my suggestion to move writing these scripts
> > to
> > > > the
> > >
> > > > > > > > encodeEnd Method of a newly created t:head/t:body component?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With this approach, we could also support including component
> > >
> > > > > > > > resources in the header much better, as we have a clear marker
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > major areas of the HTML page...
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Trainings in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > >
> > > > > > JSF Trainings in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Trainings in English and German
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Trainings in English and German
> > > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Trainings in English and German
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Trainings in English and German
>
--
http://www.irian.at
Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Trainings in English and German
