Mario Ivankovits schrieb: > Hi Werner! >> Jesse Alexander (KSFD 121) schrieb: >> >>> Do you mean replicating the tomahawk-components or different >>> components under the tomahawk-sign? >>> >> Different components, I have had this idea for some time now. >> > Sorry, I dont like this idea. > > I dont know, why you think facelets are speedier. They use exactly the > same renderer class, no? >
Actually they are faster, but that is not my point, my point was to enable easier component editing and having a good set of components built upon an easier component tech. > The only thing you win is not to have to write the tag class and a tld. > Its not worth to risk to have new components only work with facelets. > > Wasnt one of the ideas of JSF to allow a migration from JSP to JSF? We > shouldnt break it. > > But I admit having to write the html markup in an renderer is a pain. > What about a html2jsf converter which takes a html input file and > generates the out.write stuff? > Should be possible. > Well for a quick solution I would see velocity, but the main problem is, using vel on component level would mean a huge speed hit, while vel is very fast it is not fast if you have to trigger the parsing stage for every component. But that does not relieve us of the burden of having to maintain a taglib binding and two xml entries. But the main problem I have with the current approach is that for a simple 10 lines of html and javascript I have 200 or more lines 3 classes and two xml entries of component markup. Sure there is finally a codegen generating some of that stuff, but still maintaining thise code bloat is a huge burden. So we have easy client side componentization, why not use it?
