Hi Scott, via javascript - I just add it dynamically on the client. Works for all major browsers just fine.
regards, Martin On 9/4/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How are you getting the stylesheet reference into the header now? > JSR-168 does not have a means of doing this. > > Scott > > Martin Marinschek wrote: > > Yes, sure - it's the same problem. I've added it via javascript to the > > head, works as well. Just adding it somewhere in the content might > > work, but is essentially invalid html. > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On 8/31/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> What I envisioned for Trinidad is namespacing the CSS file and loading > >> it outside of the head. Would something like that be a possibility for > >> Tomohawk? I mean I imagine any bridge would have this issue would it not? > >> > >> Scott > >> > >> Martin Marinschek wrote: > >> > >>> My guess is that Tomahawk won't run out of the box with this bridge - > >>> problem: css-files needed by components won't be added to the head > >>> properly. > >>> > >>> regards, > >>> > >>> Martin > >>> > >>> On 8/17/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> :-) > >>>> > >>>> Yes, but I guess there might be some more impls out there, > >>>> like one that comes with the container ;-) > >>>> > >>>> So, yes only one that goes with 301 (like this one ;-) ) > >>>> > >>>> -M > >>>> > >>>> On 8/17/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Right. But for 1.2 and higher JSF implementations, you would not need > >>>>> to use another bridge. This one should be the only one you'd need. > >>>>> > >>>>> Scott > >>>>> > >>>>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> yeah, sort of. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> there are currently (mainly for JSF 1.1) tons of "JSF-Bridges" > >>>>>> -Apache MyFaces Core (not Tomahawk ;-) ) > >>>>>> -Apache Portals Bridges (they have that for old school struts as well) > >>>>>> -Suns RI has a module for JSF-Portlet integration > >>>>>> -,,, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> so, this one "fixes" that. > >>>>>> It's a standard > >>>>>> > >>>>>> javax. .... and just an impl (that does what the papers want (or tries > >>>>>> ;-) )) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -M > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 8/17/07, Alexander Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Ok.. but with this bridge and the right version of myfaces you would > >>>>>>> not need something like the tomahawk bridge any more... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> thanks a bunch! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Aug 17, 2007, at 10:54 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> there was no real tomahawk bridge. > >>>>>>>> that stuff is part of myfaces 1.1 (the core impl) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> the difference here is that 301 specifies a way, how a JSF 1.2 > >>>>>>>> application should work inside a portal. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> for jsf 1.1 there was "just" a note like "JSF 1.1 should run in a > >>>>>>>> portlet..." (very simplified statement) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> So, no not a replacement, "just" an IMPL of the java SPEC ;-) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 8/17/07, Alexander Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Does this bridge replace Tomahawk bridge? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Aug 17, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Scott O'Bryan wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me. Should we open up a discussion though on > >>>>>>>>>> "where" this should be committed so that we can hit the ground > >>>>>>>>>> running once the paperwork is listed? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Scott > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hey everyone. After tearing though the bureaucracy much slower > >>>>>>>>>>>> then I > >>>>>>>>>>>> would have liked, I uploaded the code to MYFACES-1664 for the > >>>>>>>>>>>> JSR-301 > >>>>>>>>>>>> Portlet Bridge. This code should comply with the latest public > >>>>>>>>>>>> draft of > >>>>>>>>>>>> the JSR-301 specification and, once we figure out where to put > >>>>>>>>>>>> this and > >>>>>>>>>>>> get it made available in svn, I'd like to see people get their > >>>>>>>>>>>> hands on > >>>>>>>>>>>> it and try it out. It is going to change some things (for the > >>>>>>>>>>>> better I > >>>>>>>>>>>> hope), but if there are any unresolvable issues with it, my hope > >>>>>>>>>>>> is that > >>>>>>>>>>>> we can get those concerns voiced so that we can incorporate them > >>>>>>>>>>>> into > >>>>>>>>>>>> the final draft. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> That said, what are our next steps? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> we have to wait with the commit, until that the paperworks > >>>>>>>>>>> (Schedule > >>>>>>>>>>> B) is listed here: > >>>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -M > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Scott > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> further stuff: > >>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>>>>>>> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Matthias Wessendorf > >>>> > >>>> further stuff: > >>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >>>> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
