Thomas, I can't say for sure which components aren't working. All of the components I'm using are working, but I'm not using all of them.
The ones I've heard the most complaints about in the past are tree, tree2, and jscookmenu. But it's never been clear to me whether those problems were solved. Unfortunately, these aren't components I'm using. I agree that we need some facelets examples, and at some point, I hope to start converting the current examples over to jspx and then have them work for both facelets and jsp with little-to-no changes, so that very little effort is required to support both. A facelet component tag handler is the rarely-needed facelet equivalent of a JSP Tag class. Most of the time, all that's necessary to use a component in facelets is to define it (associate the namespace, tag name, component type, and render type together) in a facelets taglib.xml file. Facelets then works directly with the component, never accessing the equivalent JSP Tag class. Occasionally, a JSP tag class does something tricky, and you'll need to write a facelet component tag handler. Such a handler is configured to do things like alias attributes (ie, if the user specifies "showNav" for tree2, the handler could change that reference to "org.apache.myfaces.tree2.SHOW_NAV"), specify method binding signatures (like for "getBytesMethod" and "getContentTypeMethod" attributes on graphicImageDynamic), and other weird stuff that happens in Tag classes. If components are cleanly written (ie, no logic in the JSP tag), then the only time you'd need a facelets component tag handler is to specify the signature of an attribute that takes a method binding as an argument. Sometimes, a non-component tag like updateActionListener can only be implemented as a facelets tag handler (a facelets component tag handler is a subclass of a facelets tag handler that's optimized for dealing with components). Andrew Robinson has written updateActionListener as a facelet tag handler. http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/jsf-comp/facelets/tagHandlers/src/net/sf/jsfcomp/facelets/taghandlers/tomahawk/UpdateActionListenerHandler.java?view=markup Some might be asking what's the point if you have to rewrite facelet tags. However, most of the time, you don't need a facelet tag. And even when you do need one, the code to create it is pretty trivial (one or two lines in a subclass) since the base component tag handler class is rules-based, and all of the standard situations are already handled with default rules. For instance, the tag handler for graphicImageDynamic looks like this: protected MetaRuleset createMetaRuleset(Class type) { MetaRuleset m = super.createMetaRuleset(type); m.addRule(new MethodRule("getBytesMethod", byte[].class, new Class[0])); m.addRule(new MethodRule("getContentTypeMethod", String.class, new Class[0])); return m; } A partial tag handler for tree2 in its current state might look like this: protected MetaRuleset createMetaRuleset(Class type) { MetaRuleset m = super.createMetaRuleset(type); m.alias("showNav", "org.apache.myfaces.tree2.SHOW_NAV"); return m; } As Adam mentioned before, the JSP tags for ADF Faces are about 1Mb in size, but the equivalent facelet tag code is about 8k in size. Or to put it another way, I had the compareToValidator finished for several weeks, but I was too lazy to write the JSP tag handler (I didn't need a facelets tag handler) until recently. -Mike On 12/17/05, Thomas Spiegl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mike, > > can you tell us which tomahawk components are not working properly with > facelets? > > Some time ago I fixed panelNavigation2 to make it work > with facelets. I didn't test it recently, basically because I have no > example application using facelets. It would be good to have > a facelets example in MyFaces. > I totally agree that taglib.xml should be created automatically. > Unfortunatley > the xml definition files for code genartion are outdated or even not > existend > for most tomahawk components. > > What is the need for the facelet component tag handler you mentioned? > > Thomas > > > > On 12/17/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > @facelets working with MyFaces: > > > > Well, I was under the impression (by what Jacob and Adam pointed out) > > that Myfaces and Facelets didn't work together exceptionally good. > > > > So you say it works and there are just some minor flaws? > > > > regards, > > > > Maritn > > > > So you are saying it works but > > On 12/17/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes, they are still in old jsp format. > > > > > > We should rework them in jspx anyways at some point in time. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > On 12/16/05, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > On 12/14/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > we haven't as we still have some open bugs which prevent working > > > > > Facelets perfectly with MyFaces. So this is a hen-egg problem. If we > > > > > got rid of those bugs, we'd use Facelets more, if Facelets was used > > > > > more, there might be someone inclined to get rid of those bugs ;). > > > > > > > > As facelets end-user #1 (so I'm told), I can say that facelets has > > > > worked, and continues to work, fine with MyFaces (I have used MyFaces > > > > and facelets exclusively the last 6 months). There's a few tomahawk > > > > and sandbox components out there that need better facelet support, and > > > > hopefully I can be instrumental in getting that developed, as time > > > > permits, but most of them work "as-is" right now. > > > > > > > > One of the things I'd like to see happen is to have the facelets > > > > taglib.xml files generated automatically for the tomahawk and sandbox > > > > components. That's probably going to require getting code generation > > > > working again, and I haven't had a chance to review that part of the > > > > project. I think the Shale/Clay folks would like to see similar > > > > functionality provided for their view handler. > > > > > > > > The other thing that will be helpful is to get some facelet component > > > > tag handler classes written and added to the myfaces codebase for > > > > those components that have non-ActionSource method bindings (or > > > > non-pass-through Tag code behavior). This will require a build-time > > > > dependency on facelets for tomahawk and sandbox, so it might need to > > > > be done in such a way as to make building these classes optional. > > > > > > > > And, of course, we need some examples. As Adam has mentioned, > > > > facelet xhtml pages are so close to jspx pages that often times you > > > > can "convert" between the two simply by renaming them. Unfortunately > > > > (and I haven't looked at the examples in detail recently, so I could > > > > be wrong), the examples are mostly in jsp, and contain a lot of > > > > embedded scriptlets. > > > > > > > > -Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > > Courses in English and German > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
