On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Werner Punz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
>>>
>>> The Trinidad request queue has about 1000 lines of code, 80% of it(the
>>> entire iframe part, multi part form posts, the abstractions to hide
>>
>> regarding iframe:
>> that is needed when you do an "ppr for a form that contains an upload".
>> XHR does not support that.
>>
>> So, you are saying the spec does only support XHR for ajax form submits ?
>> That would be sweet... But that would fit the current ignorance of Java EE
>> land
>> to generally (out of the box) not support (out of the box) the upload
>> case at all
>> (meaning, there is no standard API for processing uploads, every framework
>> has
>> its own).
>>
> I would not be so harsh all this currently is a huge work in progress as
> I could see from the differences between the spec and the RI...

sure, here we should just implement that. I don't think that the TCK
does check for "Iframe communication channel presen" :-)

>
> Since I am not in the EG I have
> only info from what I can gather from the released pdfs and javadocs
> and from the RI. The RI always seems to be ahead from the released PDFs
> so I usually take it as my core reference.
>
> a) I am aware of the upload issue and that you can only do it via
> iframes if you want to stay on a clean html side. I will give a short
> info on what I could gather from the spec and RI:
>
> Sending a form is, that you have to gather the viewstate and you have to
> send it as encoded String!
> also you have to add various parameters and you can define a map of
> passthrough values which have to be encoded similarily on the client side!
>
> The request must be queued and it must be send asynchronously.
> It is not clearly stated that you have to use xmlhttprequest for
> sending, the RI however currently uses xmlhttprequest only!

which would cause serious bugs when one uses uploads :-)

>
> Not sure if you can say an iframe post is an asynchronous post, but I
> assume so...
>
>
>> So, wouldn't that also mean there is no chance in doing "PPR form
>> submit" for upload cases, in
>> a standard way? Wouldn't that cause forks, different APIs etc for
>> different toolkits
>
> At the current state of the RI is not, and I am not sure if the spec has
> this loophole open, but as it is this needs to be clearly specified one
> way or the other!
> Otherwise we will have the next mess on our hands!
> My per
>
> The spec is rather vague on all this and the issue is that the RI as
> core reference at the last public release (which funnily is not the same
> as the last public released specs, the RI clearly is from mid december
> while the pdfs are from november), does not cover it yet, either means
> they are not aware of those issues or they simply do not have tackled it.

IMO it is not the fault of JSF, that there is this unhappy situation w/ uploads,
Java EE, or Servlet 3, should address that. If upload was supported as
first class
citizens in the JavaEE *umbrella* land, JSF spec would be more aware of it.

Well, let's see what the final spec will contain.

FYI. I pinged Andy Schwartz on this, how is Oracle's JSF spec dude.

-Matthias

>
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Reply via email to