Removing the <view-handler /> element from my faces-config.xml did the trick.
Funny that everything worked properly, except the rerendering. Should we add some code to prevent people from making the same mistake? Thanks Mike, JK 2009/8/10 Michael Concini <[email protected]>: > Jan-Kees van Andel wrote: >>> >>> The default in the current 2.0 runtime should be using >>> org.apache.mfyaces.application.ViewHandlerImpl, which is a single class >>> implementation for both JSP and facelets. It uses the FactoryFinder to >>> get >>> the right ViewDeclarationLanguage implementation depending on whether >>> you're >>> using JSP or facelets since nearly all of the actual work is done in the >>> VDL >>> classes now. The old JSP and facelets ViewHandler impls shouldn't really >>> be >>> used anymore and as far as I know haven't been updated to the 2.0 spec. >>> >> >> I'm gonna check it tonight (@work now), but the last time I checked, I >> saw the ViewHandlerImpl being returned, but I have to check to be >> sure. >> >> But you're saying that specifying the <view-handler /> element in >> faces-config.xml is redundant and probably incorect? In that case, I'm >> gonna remove it and check if it works. I've added it a while ago >> because I got the JSP ViewHandler back then. Maybe things have changed >> in the meantime. >> >> > > That makes sense if you had originally set things up more than a few weeks > ago. The new ViewHandlerImpl class was in place but we hadn't changed the > default config to use it until sometime in July once most of the VDL impls > were ready and we were trying to get some apps working. >>> >>> If you're getting the JSP VDL back from ViewHandlerImpl, then there is >>> something not configured right either. Maybe in our default config files >>> or >>> the factory definition? >>> Let me know if you need me to check into it and I should be able to later >>> this week. I'm on vacation visiting family right now though so it might >>> be >>> a few days. >>> >> >> Thanks for the offer. I'm gonna debug a bit first, and then I'll come >> back to you. >> >> Regards, >> Jan-Kees >> >> > > Sounds good...shoot an email to let me know if you need me to check on it. > Thanks, > Mike >
