On 3/15/07, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One big concern I have is that we do not go to such an extreme (like Tobago did) that we are no longer compatible with other component sets. Once you start requiring a specific kind of form or document, then you've just made yourself incompatible with anything else that might require a specific kind of form or document.
Trinidad also has a *need* for document, when doing PPR http://incubator.apache.org/adffaces/trinidad-api/tagdoc/tr_panelPartialRoot.html
I'm not entirely certain what the issue with the Extensions filter is (beyond portlet-incompatiblity). Once it's configured, it seems to work just fine, and it doesn't break compatiblity with other component sets.
-portlet (trinidad uses a servlet for resources like images, not sure if that better works in portlet land) one of the other things is, that the *filter* adds the JS (addToHeader() or what ever the syntax is) -M
On 3/15/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also one *target* should be getting rid of the extension filter and > use an approach like Trinidad document or Tobago's page, where the > components (their renderers) register themselfs and put out their > resources, like funny javascript. > > also the "common fileupload" (done in Tobago Contrib, already). > > On 3/15/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > myfaces commons should first contain the "tomahawk non-renderkit" things. > > putting stuff there from tobago and trinidad is a next step, to me > > > > -M > > > > On 3/15/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >From: "Mike Kienenberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > Still a huge first step would be a "myfaces commons", containing stuff > > > > > > like updateActionlistener and validators/converters. > > > > > > > > On 3/15/07, Gary VanMatre wrote: > > > > > I would think that even moving the validators and converters out would > > > be a > > > > > big step since they provide client side support. There would need to be > > > a > > > > > *single* script delivery mechanism and the component renderers would > > > need to > > > > > have API hooks in order to act on behalf of these "components" > > > (converters, > > > > > validators) that don't have renderers. > > > > > > > > We're only talking about moving things with no renderkit dependencies > > > > into commons. That's true for most of the Tomahawk converters and > > > > validators. Commons would contain things that should be usable in > > > > any JSF implementation an d with any JSF component set. > > > > > > Oh, I was thinking about Trinidad's Converters and Validators. > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthias Wessendorf > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh > > > > further stuff: > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh > > further stuff: > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com >
-- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
