How could there be a reason not to do this? (This is not a rhetorical question.)
Jack On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:08:40 -0400, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:50:05 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote: > > My personal itch is to not have to build everything from scratch -- > > its to build on the JSF request processing lifecycle, without > > committing you to any particular view tier templating approach. > > Doing more work than that is ... more work. > > Granted that Shale will be painful to implement without the support of another > framework, like JavaServer Faces, could we still position JSF as one possible > implementation of Shale. > > For example, instead of an "impl" folder, could we have a "faces" folder? > > And would it be all right if I reorganized the API JavaDoc for ViewController to > distinguish between the "abstract" responsibilities of the interface and what > happens when an ViewController implementation is wired to JSF? > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- "You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep." ~Native Proverb~ "Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows." ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
