tr:form is not a naming container - while h:form is.
For people developing new pages, this is a big
advantage (far easier than setting forceId everywhere).
If you want to preserve this old JS, then just use:
<tr:form>
<f:subview id = "browser">
...
</f:subview>
</tr:form>
-- Adam
On 2/23/07, Renzo Tomaselli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, in a page of mine I replaced a f:form by a tr:form, because of the
well known issue with Tomahawk jscookmenu missing a hidden field.
As a side effect - I noticed a change concerning the way nested
identifiers are generated.
If I put:
<f:form id = "browser">
<tr:commandButton id="double" ...
then the generated if for this button is "browser:double".
If I replace the form tag by:
<tr:form id = "browser">
then the generated button id is simply "browser".
Needlessy to say, this harmless replacement invalidates an entire bunch
of js code, expecting the combined ids.
Is nesting parameter-driven anywhere ? Any comment ?
Thanks -- Renzo
