Hello all, +1 on making most of those API public, even if it means to redo some architectural work to reduce coupling. I would be +1 to place that kind of library in a completely different JAR as well to allow other libraries like Tomahawk to use the feature without having a dependency toward Trinidad.
Regards, ~ Simon p.s. I'm still alive, I'm just assigned full time on a project and a full time semester at University. On 9/18/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Adam, how does this fit into the plan of refactoring out skinning and some of the other stuff to a general support package that might be used by tomahawk as well? regards, Martin On 9/19/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Trinidad has a whole bunch of APIs for writing Renderers - lots in > org.apache.myfaces.trinidadinternal.renderkit,and elsewhere - > which are, by virtue of their packaging, off-limits as far as > general third-party development goes. So, no one can rely > on their stability, which is something that we'll need to solve > going forward. > > I'd like to start moving some of these out of "trinidadinternal" > and the trinidad-impl JAR, and into the main, stable > trinidad-api JAR so that developers can start writing renderers, > skins, etc., without fear that we'll keep breaking the APIs. > > On a first pass, this would ideally involve at the > following APIs: > > - RenderingContext > - FormData > - Skin, SkinFactory, SkinExtension > - Icon (and everything in the icon package) > - PartialPageContext > - CoreRenderer > - TrinidadAgent and related APIs > - AccessKeyUtils > - OutputUtils > - XhtmlUtils > - SelectItemSupport > > Unfortunately, there's some issues with moving over all of these. For > example, > Jeanne Waldman has some proposed Icon API changes; and Skin currently > has hard dependencies on things like StyleSheetDocument, etc., which I > really > don't think we want in our public API. So, I think this'll have to be a > combination > of some refactoring to get the private details moved down lower, and a > go-slow > with some of these classes that need changes. > > but maybe not > - XhtmlRenderer > - XhtmlConstants > - SkinSelectors > > and definitely not at this time > - any of our concrete renderer classes > > Comments? > > -- Adam > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
