There are a couple reasons I went down that road, 1: at first, when trying to get things working, it was much easier to be able to directly access the component in javascript. I wanted to get this working without having to deal with unknown id's, and then come back to get it working for those cases. 2: If you reference the components in javascript by their derived id, for example: var component_form1:subview2:table3, javascript pukes, as would java or any other languages. This could be avoided I'm sure, but it was something that was occuring. 3: I have to make it work for forceId anyways so that I can access the components from javascript in a deterministic way.
Travis On 11/22/05, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Travis, > > I don't know anything about the AJAX compoents so please excuse me if > this is a silly question. But why are the AJAX components requiring > "forceId" in the first place? > > If a component's true id at the back end is "form1:subview2:table3", > then why not use that id in all the AJAX stuff rather than requiring the > table to use forceId? > > Travis Reeder wrote: > > Yes, I can use forceId=true when I want it, but my sentiments exactly > > (about altering the id), if I set an ID, it would be nice to not have > > to set forceId="true" also. Especially in this new rich client / > > ajaxing era that we seem to be rolling into. >
