Hi Mike, if you want my opinion: I do think that AJAX integration in JSF 2.0 will resemble what you get with DynaFaces somewhat. Trinidad will of course work with/on this API. I think that the standard will not go as far as what ICEsoft does - but then, I think that also ICEsoft will try to be compatible.
regards, Martin On 9/7/07, Ted Goddard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ICEsoft is on the expert group for JSF 2.0, and we're very interested > in contributing relevant ideas from ICEfaces. Naturally, ICEfaces > will support JSF 2.0 as a JSF platform. > > ICEfaces will always provide developers with purely declarative > page design; in the future it may make use of underlying PPR > mechanisms for optimization, but it will not be necessary for > developers to refer to page regions within their application. > > Cheers, > Ted. > > > > On 6-Sep-07, at 11:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > I have read where Ajax4jsf is dedicated to being aligned with the > > ajax implementation specified in JSF 2.0. I would assume that > > Dynafaces from SUN is similar. What about Trinidad's PPR > > mechanism? I had also read that ICEFaces approach was very > > different which could be problematic. > > I am trying to guage the long term ramifications of using Trinidad > > or ICEFaces. > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
