We haven't used the MyFaces Tiles support in our project; we're just using Tiles directly with JSF. So, for us, our <to-view-id> exactly matches the name given in the Tiles definition.
- Brendan -----Original Message----- From: Martin Marinschek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 3:37 AM To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: Re: feel like an idiot... basic tiles question Look into JSPTilesViewHandlerImpl - the correlation is just that the prefix of .tiles needs to be the same as the prefix of the .jsp... regards, Martin On 8/19/05, Rick Reumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Man, this is annoying since I know this has to be simple. I'm looking at > both the Core JSF book and the MyFaces tiles example application. > Question... > > "How is the definition name in your tiles defiition related to your > 'to-view-id'?" > > I don't see this documented anywhere. For example in the MyFaces tiles > example a to-view-id looks like: > > <to-view-id>/page2.jsp</to-view-id> > > And for a tile definition I see: > > <definition name="/page2.tiles" extends="layout.example" > > > What are the rules in how this tile definition is picked up? I see other > examples (ie Geary's book) he doesn't use *.tiles in his definition, so I'm > missing the logic in how this definition gets picked up? In Struts it's easy > since that definition name must match the String in mapping.findForward that > I call from my Actions. > > Thanks. > > -- > Rick -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Trainings in English and German
