Yes, that's true! regards,
Martin On 9/7/07, Scott O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well that can always be done, namespacing or not. Trinidad has a slight > advantage on this in that our skinning system generates the ids and all > the mappings throughout the renderkit. So adding a namespace should be > pretty straight forward. > > Scott > > Martin Marinschek wrote: > > 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
