I don't see anything that prevents someone from changing the unique
prefix value, but it'd be difficult to come up with a short yet
guaranteed-to-be-unique alternative, considering that the spec only
allows characters, -, and _ as symbols.
From the spec:
3.1.1 Component Identifiers
Every component may be named by a component identifier, which (if
utilized) must be
unique among the components that share a common naming container parent in a
component tree. Component identifiers must conform to the following rules:
They must start with a letter (as defined by the Character.isLetter()
method) or underscore ('_').
Subsequent characters may be letters (as defined by the
Character.isLetter() method), digits as defined by the
Character.isDigit() method, dashes ('-'), and underscores ('_').
To minimize the size of responses generated by JavaServer Faces, it is
recommended
that component identifiers be as short as possible.
If a component has been given an identifier, it must be unique in the
namespace of
the closest ancestor to that component that is a NamingContainer (if any).
public String getId();
public void setId(String componentId);
Also,
http://java.sun.com/javaee/javaserverfaces/1.1/docs/renderkitdocs/
General notes regarding the id attribute
All components, and therefore all tags for those components
support the id attribute. This attribute is optional. If not present
its value is autogenerated by the implementation and used for internal
purposes only. If present, an id attribute must not start with the
String listed as the value of the constant
UIViewRoot.UNIQUE_ID_PREFIX, and it must be unique within the scope of
the nearest component that is a NamingContainer.
All renderers must take the following action regarding theid
attribute: If the value returned fromcomponent.getId() is non-null and
does not start with UIViewRoot.UNIQUE_ID_PREFIX,
callcomponent.getClientId() and render the result as the value of the
id attribute in the markup for the component. See the javadoc
forcomponent.getClientId() for details, particularly note that the
Renderer has a chance to modify the client id before it is rendered.
If the component doesn't generate any markup elements, include the id
attribte on a "span" element that encloses the content for the
component.
In addition to any action already specified in the renderers,
all renderers for UIInput components must take the following action
regarding the id attribute: Callcomponent.getClientId() and render the
result as the value of the name attribute. This may cause some
renderers to have "id" and "name" attributes that have exactly the
same value.
On 4/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually, that very specific error also gives me headache too, but it come
directly from the official API. See UIViewRoot.createUniqueId() and
UIViewRoot.UNIQUE_ID_PREFIX.
That being said, the spec does not forces the value of UNIQUE_ID_PREFIX
(which is _id in the RI API) so I guess MyFaces could give it another, HTML
4.01 compliant value, and I sure hope so.
http://java.sun.com/javaee/javaserverfaces/1.1_01/docs/api/javax/faces/component/UIViewRoot.html
http://java.sun.com/javaee/javaserverfaces/1.1_01/docs/api/constant-values.html#javax.faces.component.UIViewRoot.UNIQUE_ID_PREFIX
Regards,
~ Simon
On 4/18/07, Rudi Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/16/07, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > From the JSF 1.1 spec:
> > =============================
> > 8.5 Standard HTML RenderKit
> > Implementation
> > To ensure application portability, all JSF implementations are
> > required to include
> > support for a RenderKit, and the associated Renderers, that meet the
> > requirements defined in this section, to generate textual markup that
> > is compatible
> > with HTML 4.01.
> > =============================
> >
> > However, if there are changes we can make to MyFaces Core that will
> > improve xhtml support while still meeting the above requirement, we
> > can make them.
> >
> >
> > On 4/16/07, Rudi Steiner < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > making some investigations on XHTML-comfomance fo myFaces (without
> > > Tomahawk) I found out, that the output of the basic components, like
> > > <h:form/>, <h:commandButton/> and so on render valid XHTML but just
> > > transitional (<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
> > > Transitional//EN"
> > > "
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";>).
> > >
> > > The problem is, that our customer requires XHTML-Strict (<!DOCTYPE
> > > html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
> > >
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>).
> > >
> > > Running the XHTML-output of a standard form against the validator of
> > > the W3C. I get some errormessages.
> > >
> > > The first one ist, that there is no name-attribute in the defined DTD
> > > for the form-element, but the <h:form/>-tag renders it:
> > >
> > > <form id="_idJsp2" name="_idJsp2" method="post" action=
> > >
> > > The second error is, that the hidden fields inserted by the
> > > JSF-implementation into the form are not enclosed in a div-Element. If
> > > I but my input-Elements inside the form in a <t:div/>, this elements
> > > are enclosed in a <div> and don't produce any errors, but the hidden
> > > fields inserted by myfaces are rendered after the closing </div>-Tag.
> > >
> > > Has anyone an idea? Isn't it required by the JSF-Spec to render
> > > XHTML-Strict to be a standard conform implementation?
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Rudi
> > >
> >
>
> Hello Mike,
>
> I tested the generated output of a <h:form/> with the following doctype
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";>
>
> with the validator at http://validator.w3.org/ . The validator
> generates a lot of errors, for example this one:
> Line 20 column 11: value of attribute "ID" invalid: "_" cannot start a
name.
> <form id="_idJsp4" name="_idJsp4" method="post"
action="/Pro/createPerson.jsf"
>
> Changeing the Doctype of the same markup to
>
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd
">
>
> the markup passes validation.
>
> Does this mean, that myFaces is not Spec-conform, given that the spec
> says HTML 4.01 must be generated?
>
> Best regards,
> Rudi
>
