On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:20:45 -0700, Craig McClanahan wrote: > Ted can correct my understanding of his position if I'm wrong, but > basically he wants Struts to be view tier agnostic. I'll agree > with that on the actual technology used to implement the dynamic > rendering (JSF lets you do that already), but not on abstracting > the entire request processing lifecycle. JSF already provides a > solid foundation on which to build application level controller > facilities, and I see no point in re-inventing that part.
It's just my feeling that we should either leave the door open to non-JSF implementations of Shale, should someone want to do one. I'm not saying that anyone will do an alternate implementation. But I do believe it would be helpful to distinguish where the top-level of the Shale API ends, and the JSF-based implementation begins. Or, in order words, to clearly define the value Shale adds to the JSF lifecycle. At this point, I'm only suggesting that we (meaning I) try to document the view controller a little differently, and that we rename the package called "impl" as "faces". I am absolutely and totally in favor of a lightweight framework that rides on top of JavaServer Faces. It's an excellent idea, and I do want to do whatever I can to help. Right now, I'm just trying to keep it clear in my own tiny mind where the rider ends and the horse begins. -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
