We could move the script generation from endDocument to encodeEnd in t:head or t:body - tag...
With that we make sure that no scripts are outputted after the document has already been closed! Manfred suggests as a solution to parse the input for head - or body tags, I don't like having to parse the whole output for these strings - there are just too many possibilities. With a clearly defined call to startElement, we know the position! regards, Martin On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it does. > So, basically, a phase listener would start the filter's job if the filter > hasn't been configured. Right ? > > I'm not 100% sure how it solves MYFACES-152 though. > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 16:08 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote: > Well, any HTML before the JSF components would just be rendered out - > untouched! > > As soon as the JSF processing starts, we start caching the response. > When the t:body element is closed, we write out the cached data. > > Our existing filter might work unchanged, if I don't have any problems > in my reasoning... > > Sounds reasonable? > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 15:55 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > Yes, but ideally we would find a way to integrate it into the > > life-cycle - not having a separate filter, with this we could > > "remember" the insert position. > > > > Not having a separate filter would be good, but I don't know how this can > > be done, as any HTML rendered before the JSF components would be lost. > > > > > > Wait a minute - we could set the insert position by setting request > > parameters which the filter reads, right? > > > > Sure ! > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So, If I understand you well, the t:head for example would render > > something > > > like : > > > <head><!-- Hello, I'm the tomahawk head Start --> > > > ... > > > <!-- Hello, I'm the tomahawk head End --></head> > > > > > > And the extensions filter would first search for the "<!-- Hello, I'm > the > > > tomahawk head Start -->" to get the insert position. > > > If he doesn't find it, it would fallback on the current parsing. > > > > > > Is that it ? > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 15:40 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > > Basically, it would work very much like the approach we are using today. > > > > > > So we would need to do some caching of the response, and parsing in > > > the statements as we go. We would have defined markers, though, and > > > wouldn't need to search through the whole markup! > > > > > > We are doing this today for the rendering of the javascript for > > > commandLinks... > > > > > > If we don't find a way to fix this problem, we won't be able to use > > > the ADF components with MyFaces apps, nor will facelets be properly > > > working. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > What do you mean by "he just won't have the extras" ? > > > > > > > > I think that if it's fully optional, it sure would bey good. > > > > I mean if the page has t:head & t:body, then it uses it, otherwise it > > > works > > > > as today. > > > > > > > > But if the t:head & t:body are mandatory, then this is a problem. > > > > About the RI, I meant that if an application is made to work with the > > RI, > > > > and then the user switches to MyFaces to use just a few components he > > > needs, > > > > he should not have to redesign his pages. > > > > Right now, in such a case you just setup the extensions filter, an add > > the > > > > MyFaces' tag where you want it. > > > > If you also had to redesign your pages to have a t:head & t:body, it > > would > > > > be quite a penalty for MyFaces switchers. > > > > That's what I meant by "you could not include just a t:component in a > > page > > > > that would otherwise for fine with the RI". > > > > > > > > I was also wondering how this can be done. > > > > If you are rendering an inputSuggestAjax for example, you'll need to > > > > include the js in the head. > > > > But the t:head should already be rendered. > > > > So I don't know how you're going to change a component that's already > > > > rendered. > > > > > > > > I once looked at something similar for the fileUpload, to add > > > automatically > > > > the proper encrypt method to the form, but I didn't find any good > > solution > > > > that wouldn't work as the extension filter (i.e. by parsing the > > generated > > > > HTML). > > > > > > > > Sylvain. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 14:53 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > > > I was waiting for your feedback here, Sylvain ;) > > > > > > > > I know this is problematic, for the reasons you pointed out. As things > > > > like addResource and the scroll-position javascript are special > > > > MyFaces functionality anyways, the user won't have the special > > > > features anyways with using the RI, so no change here. > > > > > > > > With using MyFaces, he won't get the functionality if he doesn't use > > > > t:head or t:body. It will still work, he just won't have the extras. > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/27/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hello Martin, > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure I understand this. > > > > > Would you require every page having a t:component to have t:head & > > > t:body > > > > > components as well ? > > > > > > > > > > If this is the case, it would be a lead to a lot ot other problems I > > > > think. > > > > > For example, it would break old pages. Also, you could not include > > just > > > a > > > > > t:component in a page that would otherwise for fine with the RI. > > > > > > > > > > Sylvain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 12:33 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > > > > Hi *, > > > > > > > > > > There is a long standing bug MYFACES-152 > > > > > > > > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-152 > > > > > > > > > > which needs our attention, for facelets and ADF faces compatibility. > > > > > > > > > > What do you say to my suggestion to move writing these scripts to > the > > > > > encodeEnd Method of a newly created t:head/t:body component? > > > > > > > > > > With this approach, we could also support including component > > > > > resources in the header much better, as we have a clear marker for > the > > > > > major areas of the HTML page... > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > > JSF Trainings in English and German > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > JSF Trainings in English and German > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Trainings in English and German > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Trainings in English and German > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Trainings in English and German
