public interface Processor {
public void process(FacesContext context,
This of course could just be process(Context // like execute(Context
and then ANYTHING is compatible on the "action" side. I realy like the
execute(Context) signature, I don't even do interfaces since everything
to me uses that.
One way to look at compatible... is how can JSF "tags" call "WW2"
"actions" via Shale. I'd think another way would be is how can Shale
back struts HTML tag and JSTL and display tags. (Which could work now
for all I know)
Like ... can I just take an Struts HTML taged jsp and have it backed by
Shale "whatever".
Or restated, rather then having a plugable back end, it's just as
interesting to have a plugable view to Shale (in my case RIA type,
client processed UI request, rather than server pushed out).
I think that if Shale could have the plugable view... the less need for
a brand new recode of WW2+Struts2 (since too many cooks ..., aka design
by committee).
Restate #X: Ideally, if Shale can have plugable View (and "Action"),
then WW2+Struts2 are just plug ins, or may ship w/ Shale.X , so Shale is
JSF centric but could use other (like Struts "classic" could use Velocity).
.V
Craig McClanahan wrote:
One of the things we talked about at the Struts BOF at ApacheCon was ways to
share technology between SAF and Shale. Here's an opportunity to do that,
which I'd like some input on.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
