@HTML and Tobago: Tobago has its own LayoutManager - something a little like the Swing-Layoutmanager concept, except that it isn't pluggable.
@HTML and Facelets: What I have been advocating in the past - and all other people I know doing any serious development with Faces is to get rid of as much HTML and Java-code in the view as possible. This is the only way to make rendering to different output formats happen... I don't want to be negative here - but if you view it this way, Facelets (and JSF1.2) is actually a step back in development as it allows you to intersperse HTML more easily again. I know that users crave for this possibility, but is it actually something that should be desired? I think that Tobago is one step further down the road here - with the layout manager, the Tobago guys abstract even more from the concrete output format. It's a shame that the thing isn't pluggable though, and that the whole thing is not compatible to standard layouting. We really ought to fix this! regards, Martin On 12/14/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Facelets is just a ViewHandler, that's it-- just as JSP is. The benefit of > Facelets with Tobago is that it would allow aliasing of Tobago components in > simple HTML divs or spans in relation to layout. Truthfully, it's a very > big, win-win situation for both projects. This is only one aspect of the > Facelets framework. If you have questions, just email the project owner on > java.net. > > -- Jacob (Facelets Guy) > > > > >We didn't have the time to really check out Facelets up to now. We > >removed the according FAQ entry and will take some time to look closer > >at Facelets. From the documentation of Facelets we just saw the > >"Tapestry-like views" aspect and this doesn't seem to make sense for Tobago. > > > >Regards, > >Arvid > > > >Adam Winer wrote: > > > >>Mike is entirely correct. There's no reason why any decent > >>JSF component library shouldn't work with Facelets, > >>and [EMAIL PROTECTED] doesn't understand Facelets. > >>ADF Faces, for example, abstracts away from HTML too; > >>Facelets makes awesome sense with ADF Faces, just as > >>it would with Tobago. > >> > >>The whole "Tapestry-like views" aspect of Facelets is just > >>one small bit of it; the major value is providing a much, much > >>better environment for JSF than JSPs are. > >> > >>Honestly, anyone who uses Facelets after JSPs will > >>never want to go back. I don't quite get why MyFaces hasn't > >>embraced Facelets fully. > >> > >>-- Adam Winer > >> > >>On 12/13/05, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I think there's some misunderstanding here about facelets. Facelets > >>>isn't tied to any particular view technology (ie, html). > >>> > >>>"Facelets are based on HTML-designed JSP source code" is untrue. > >>>Facelets doesn't use tld files or (jsp)Tag classes. Facelets works > >>>directly on the component class. > >>> > >>>There shouldn't be any reason why you can't use facelets with tobago, > >>>providing you're writing clean components. > >>> > >>> > >>>On 12/13/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Author: bommel > >>>>Date: Tue Dec 13 09:35:51 2005 > >>>>New Revision: 356552 > >>>> > >>>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=356552&view=rev > >>>>Log: > >>>>added faq for facelets > >>>> > >>>>Modified: > >>>> incubator/tobago/trunk/src/site/fml/faq.fml > >>>> incubator/tobago/trunk/tobago-theme/tobago-theme-richmond/pom.xml > >>>> > >>>>Modified: incubator/tobago/trunk/src/site/fml/faq.fml > >>>>URL: > >http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/incubator/tobago/trunk/src/site/fml/faq.fml?rev=3 > >56552&r1=356551&r2=356552&view=diff > >>>>============================================================================ > >== > >>>>--- incubator/tobago/trunk/src/site/fml/faq.fml (original) > >>>>+++ incubator/tobago/trunk/src/site/fml/faq.fml Tue Dec 13 09:35:51 2005 > >>>>@@ -22,6 +22,16 @@ > >>>> components that need a renderer.</p> > >>>> </answer> > >>>> </faq> > >>>>+ <faq id="tobago/facelets"> > >>>>+ <question>It is possible to combine tobago with > >facelets?</question> > >>>>+ <answer> > >>>>+ <p>It doesn't make sense.</p> > >>>>+ <p>Facelets are based on HTML-designed JSP source code.</p> > >>>>+ <p>Tobago on the other side abstracts from HTML. There are no > >HTML-Tags in the JSP source code. > >>>>+ There are only abstract tags. The Renderkit converts it to > >>>>HTML > >or any other ML. > >>>>+ The idea of Tobago is: The theme controls the look-and-feel of > >the page.</p> > >>>>+ </answer> > >>>>+ </faq> > >>>> <faq id="tiles/sitemesh"> > >>>> <question>Can tobago replace tiles? Can I ignore tiles and sitemesh > >in the favor of tobago or not? > >>>> </question> > >>>> > >>>>Modified: > >incubator/tobago/trunk/tobago-theme/tobago-theme-richmond/pom.xml > >>>>URL: > >http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/incubator/tobago/trunk/tobago-theme/tobago-theme- > >richmond/pom.xml?rev=356552&r1=356551&r2=356552&view=diff > >>>>============================================================================ > >== > >>>>--- incubator/tobago/trunk/tobago-theme/tobago-theme-richmond/pom.xml > >(original) > >>>>+++ incubator/tobago/trunk/tobago-theme/tobago-theme-richmond/pom.xml Tue > >Dec 13 09:35:51 2005 > >>>>@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ > >>>> </parent> > >>>> <artifactId>tobago-theme-richmond</artifactId> > >>>> <packaging>jar</packaging> > >>>>- <name>Tobago theme richmond</name> > >>>>+ <name>Tobago theme Richmond</name> > >>>> <build> > >>>> <plugins> > >>>> <plugin> > >>>>@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ > >>>> </exclusions> > >>>> </dependency> > >>>> <dependency> > >>>>- <groupId>javax.servlet</groupId> > >>>>+ <groupId>javax.servlet</groupId> > >>>> <artifactId>servlet-api</artifactId> > >>>> <version>2.3</version> > >>>> <scope>provided</scope> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
