Craig McClanahan wrote:
> And you were so ***good*** about the Maven thread! :-) :-) :-)
You can't expect me to turn around all at once can you Craig?!? :) LOL
You know, I started making this a reply to that thread because I didn't
think it would go any further, and I originally said if it did then I'd
start a new thread... but, as I was typing my response I started to
realized is probably *would* go a message or two more, so better to
start that new thread now :)
> Regarding stylability, the JSF standard components basically adopted a
> common convention from the Struts tags, in that they all sport a
> "styleClass" and a "style" attribute. The former is essentially a
> passthrough to the HTML "class" attribute (you can't use that directly
> in JSP because of the way JavaBeans property names work ... getClass()
> is inherited from java.lang.Object so you can't have a JSP attribute
> named "class"). In a similar way, the "style" attribute value, if
> specified, is passed through directly.
Hmm, interesting. Don't think I knew that.
> <snip>
Lots of info there :)
I'm going to have to play a bit... my concern, which you probably could
guess, is that in using JSF I may be giving up a lot of freedom in terms
of page design. Or, more likely the case, making it more difficult to
get the same results.
I'm finding that I'm something of an anomoly (like you needed me to tell
you that!) in that I like doing page development at least as much as
server-side coding. I like the creative and visual feedback you get,
and I like pushing boundaries with CSS and layout. I'm thinking that
JSF might make that tougher to do. It sounds like to get the level of
flexibility I'd like to have would really require me developing my own
components, at which point I have to start asking myself if it's worth
it... I know there are other benefits to JSF, but at the end of the day
if I can't produce the visually attractive apps I'm known at work for
delivering that ALSO fulfill the business needs well, and doing so in at
worst the same amount of time it takes now, it's probably not justifiable.
> PS: It's pretty straightforward to build turbo versions of the Struts
> HTML tags that have many of the same features described above. But
> that doesn't begin to touch the behavior at input time, where the
> component itself deals with details like converters, and completely
> eliminates the need for a form bean.
I do see that... For all the things I've said about JSF in the past, I
*do* think many of the underlying concepts are quite good... consider
that a concession of sorts if you wish :) I'm still not convinced about
the whole picture, but some of the things like what you name above are
attractive... components that maintain their own state is another very
nice idea.
Frank
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
