Hey Mario,
Thanks for keeping me honest :-)
You've been correcting a number of my misconceptions recently :-)
I went back and reread your facelets thread, and it does appear to be
a good dynamic ui:include. Why not use ui:param instead of f:param?
ui:param is already defined for facelets.
On 10/23/07, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
> > For what it's worth, you're the first person in the history of
> > facelets to need it, at least as far as I've read on mailing lists.
> >
> Yep, sometimes I have some strange ideas .... :-)
>
> > Would it maybe be better to create a rendertime-compatible version of
> > ui:include tag?
> That is what I have posted on the facelets user ml. I just haven't had
> the time to look into a better way to pass down parameters to the include.
> It definitely will be possible I think, something like
> <ui:dynamicInclude page="">
> <f:param name="alias" value="#{backing}" />
> </ui:dynamicInclude>
> could be done (if it is what you meant), but I do not have the time yet
> to dig into this - hmmm ... when I think about it I feel it might be
> really easy. But then again, not yet - for now I'll stick with the
> aliasBean. The param way will be equally (un)flexible than the aliasBean
> yet - in fact - under the hood both will do the same.
>
> Ciao,
> Mario
>
>
