Ok, as long as it's compatible with the RI and someone commits the work, I'm +1 for a custom resolver.
If we want to go for the easier solution of a bean and someone commits the work for this, I'm +1 for the bean as well. regards, Martin On 8/17/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That resolver sounds interesting, also sorta bean approach is more than nice. As I read this thread the "new" component is not going to make it. Great. Adding components like this one looks to me "blow up" the page. Such a map/resolver looks like a better approach. Also Mike is right in his Facelets vs. JSP mail +0 on map/resolver (+0 b/c won't do the work) -Matt PS: My Oracle Germany college Frank has written an article about JSF/Security. Already printed... http://www.orablogs.com/fnimphius/archives/001790.html On 8/16/06, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/16/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hmm, but we suggested to build it as a map-bean to be able to pass > > parameters. So what would be the positive aspect of using a resolver > > with regard to parameters? > > If it's a resolver, you should be able to pass the parameters directly. > > Ie, > > security:ifAnyGranted="manager, admin" or security:ifGranted:manager > or security:ifGranted('manager'). > > basically, once it's a resolver, we should have total control of the format. > I think something like this is probably simplest: > > security:ifGranted:manager > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
