On 4/19/05, tony kerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > before i pose the following question i want to provide kudos for the > myfaces team for their tremendous effort in implementing to the spec > (and then some) and getting the project elevated to an apache top level. > > please don't take my comments as criticism, just looking for some rationale: > > is the requirement to wrap non-jsf related html or jsp tags in > <f:verbatim> elements specified in the JSF spec or is it's strict usage > open to interpretation? > > obviously the requirement is a chore for developers and makes resultant > pages more cluttered and difficult to read. >
As far as the spec is concerned, it's not an all or nothing situation. There are indeed several interoperability restrictions outlined in Section 9.2.8 ... the closest to what you are describing is a restriction on using template text (without <f:verbatim>) *inside* a component that returns true for getRendersChildren(). In general, it *should* work elsewhere (and definitely does with the JSF RI). > are there any plans to eliminate this requirement or is strict usage the > way that the myfaces team interprets the spec? > > it's kind of confusing when books like JSF in Action show unadorned html > within an <f:view> parent and this style isn't supported in myfaces... > The good news is that a very large number of these issues will be dealt with in the upcoming JSF 1.2 release, whose spec recently went to public draft status. Craig McClanahan
