Yes, I agree. The JSF Complete Reference book also states like this.
Simon Lessard wrote: > > Actually Core Java Server Faces uses backing bean when you use binding > attribute on tags. The backing bean is then the bean holding the > UIComponent > reference. > > > Regards, > > ~ Simon > > On 12/17/06, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Behrang Saeedzadeh wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > What is the difference between a managed-bean and a backing-bean? >> > >> > 1) Aren't all backing-beans, managed-beans as well? >> > 2) In which scenarios a managed-bean is not a backing-bean? >> > >> > I browsed through the JSF 1.1 spec and I couldn't find the definition >> > for either of these terms. Overall I think the spec lacks a glossary >> > (local value, etc. are not defined formally anywhere in the sepc.) >> >> A "managed bean" is something defined in a faces config file using the >> <managed-bean> tag. >> >> AFAIK, the term "backing bean" is not a term used by the JSF spec at >> all. It's a common web development term (struts, etc) that doesn't >> entirely map to the JSF concepts. My personal interpretation is that >> when a page (jsp/facelets/etc) contains EL expressions that mostly or >> entirely map onto a single managed bean, then that managed bean can be >> called the "backing bean" for that page. Note, however, that there is no >> requirement in JSF for a page to access only one managed bean; it can >> access a dozen if it wishes, in which case the term "backing bean" >> really can't be applied. >> >> And if I were using the Apache Shale View Controller, then I might use >> the term "backing bean" to talk about the object that receives the >> view-based callbacks, even if the associated page accesses a range of >> other managed beans. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Simon >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Managed-bean-vs.-Backing-beans-tf2833135.html#a7950920 Sent from the MyFaces - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
