On 6/25/05, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > Web Commons > > Web Components > For me it depends how fine grained those components are. > > Say, if there is a project which cummulates all filters for a servlet > container I am for "web commons" as it might result in project sizes we > have in "commons". > > If we manage (what I prefer) to have much much smaller parts say a > filter component to handle access control based on the ip address with > hosts allow/deny rules or another simple component to have > commons-validator available as tags for jsf (yes I know there is shale) > I am for "web components".
I am +1 for web components too ... but just wanted to note that the integration between JSF and Commons Validator in Shale is usable even if you don't buy in to the rest of the Shale architecture -- it doens't have any dependencies on the core Shale framework. That kind of independence is one of my goals for the Tiles integration in Shale as well. Except for the configuration interface (which is hooked in to the configuration of Shale overall, but is easily separable), the same is also true for the Dialogs part of Shale ... it has no runtime dependencies on the Shale framework classes, only on the portable JSF APIs. Craig --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
