NonRenderingComponent.

On 9/15/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I like this too.  A JIRA issue would be fine, but we should pick
the name for the marker interface here.  In addition to Arjuna's ideas,
maybe: NoMarkupComponent, LogicOnlyComponent?

-- Adam


On 9/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Arjuna,
>
> I like the idea of having a marker for those non-rendering-components
> and enhancing RequestContext's addPartialTarget() logic for the tree
> walk.
>
> Can you nail this issue / improvement to jira, that it doesn't get lost?
>
> -Matthias
>
>
> On 9/15/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,.
> >
> > Some components, like switcher and iterator, do not (or need not) render
> any
> > content themselves.
> > This causes problems when you try to add that component as a partial
> target,
> > eg:
> >
> > RequestScope.getCurrentInstance().addPartialTarget(switcher);
> >
> > It would be nice if the addPartialTarget method could detect that the
> > component does not render any content, walk up the tree and find the
> closest
> > ancestor that does render content and add that component as the partial
> > target.
> >
> > In order to do that, there should be a way for a component to identify
> > itself as being a no-chrome component. This way, switcher and iterator
> and
> > other 3rd party components can be added as partialTargets and things
> will
> > just magically work.
> >
> > This new interface could be called  NonRenderingComponent,
> > NoChromeComponent, NoContentComponent.
> > (Alternatively, rather than use an interface, we could use a class
> > annotation; although I am not sure of any particular advantage of
> > annotations over interfaces. I will read up on that.)
> >
> >
> > Additionally, the framework could enforce that a component marked with
> such
> > an interface does infact render nothing.
> >
> > thoughts?
> >
> > --Arjuna
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


Reply via email to