Just a quick reply from my iPod: 1) don't use a4j if you don't have to. Mixing external Ajax code with Trinidad is not recommended. 2) Use tr:panelGroupLayout to get PPR to work with as little HTML possible (although it uses a SPAN instead of a DIV for the default layout which sucks.
You need to have some HTML to be able to PPR as PPR is just that -- partial page refreshing/ replacing. You can acually PPR any component as long as you know the client ID. It does not work on plain HTML tags though (verbatim or in-line facelets). If you don't want to use tr:panelGroupLayout the I would suggest making a custom component that renders the root HTML tag that you desire. As for Trinidad not being more declarative, I keep losing this battle. There are a few people who would prefer to not support 3rd party components at all and prefer that people use 100% trinidad. Others don't want new PPR components, they feel that only renderkit oriented components belong in Trinidad. I share neither of these views. Trinidad is not just a renderkit, it is a full framework IMO. If you agree with that as well, users need to ask for this functionality as only popular opinion can win this debate. -Andrew On 5/24/08, Stephen Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I really don't meant my statement to be personal at all. > It was more a general comment on Trinidad. > I apologize if it sounded differently. > > I hesitate a lot to bring A4J into my app, because my experience is that > each new technology in the stack is good for a couple of days of > configuration > and debugging nightmare. > > There was an article about how to enable PPR for custom (non-JSF) > components. > I'll try and do that with a component that simply renders a <div>. > > Thanks for your comments. > > Scott O'Bryan wrote: >> No need to get personal, I'm just telling you about what philosophy >> Trinidad has origionally taken. The idea does have some technical >> merit. It is very difficult to optimize/ppr content you don't own. >> ESPECIALLY if such content is JSF content. Trinidad didn't want to have >> to tackles the issues involved technically. >> It's not arrogance, simply that Trinidad wasn't written to be an AJAX >> enablement engine as much as a rich-type renderkit which extends JSF to >> do a complete GUI. >> >> I'm also not saying that your ideas don't have merit, and your certainly >> welcome to argue them on the community forums here, but try to be more >> constructive. >> >> My suggestion about A4J was just that. A4J does things on the PPR front >> differently then Trinidad does. It does this specifically because it IS >> an AJAX enablement engine, but not as much a application development >> renderkit like Trinidad is. Each architecture has merit and I'm not >> sure there is a one-size-fits-all scenario to this issue. >> >> BTW- putting content inside of a panel that has a partial trigger will >> get the behavior you want in facelets I believe. I haven't tried it >> myself, and it doesn't work with JSP's so long as you rely on JSTL, but >> I think facelets might actually fix that issue. >> >> Scott >> >> Stephen Friedrich wrote: >>> Too bad - and a strange (or arrogant) philosophy. >>> If there aren't any technical issues I haven't yet understood, I think >>> such a feature/tag should be included. >>> Why be so inflexible and malignant considering other technologies? >>> >>> Trinidad: All your html are belong to us? >>> >>> That might perhaps have been an Oracle strategy, but it doesn't suite an >>> Open Source project that well. >>> >>> My app does indeed use mostly Trinidad components. >>> PPR is a great feature and time saver. >>> I would not want to do without panelFormLayout. >>> Lighweight dialogs are desperately needed. >>> >>> There are just a few cases where a couple of lines of html plus >>> some css saves me from creating custom renderers or jsf components >>> (like a highly creative process train (think "advertising agency >>> employee with a faible for photoshop")). >>> >>> >>> Scott O'Bryan wrote: >>>> The reason is one of philosophy. And there has been some debate over >>>> this on the dev lists. I think Andrew has something which may be >>>> thrown into the sandbox.. however.. >>>> >>>> Trindiad renderkit works off the assumption that most of your content >>>> will be trinidad content. As such, it has PPR built in to each >>>> component and the famework necessary to support that PPR. Components >>>> external to Trinidad are assumed to be able to do their own PPR and >>>> that is where the philosophy comes in. Trinidad does not try to PPR >>>> the world, it only tries to ppr itself so it can better optimize. >>>> >>>> Some renderkits (like A4J) take the opposite approach and basically >>>> look at adding AJAX functionality to existing non-ppr enabled >>>> renterkits/content. Maybe you would be better off using a technology >>>> like that instead of Trinidad for your application. >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> Stephen Friedrich wrote: >>>>> I have some very specific components in my project, made using facelets >>>>> and containing mostly pure html (with some ui:repeat thrown in). >>>>> >>>>> How am I supposed to make such a component the target of PPR? >>>>> >>>>> Why isn't there a simple non-rendering trinidad component for that >>>>> purpose, e.g. >>>>> >>>>> <tr:fragment partialTriggers="region"> >>>>> ... html ... >>>>> </tr:fragment> >>>>> >>>>> That component could also have a rendered attribute which is nicer than >>>>> using <c:if> (and avoids confusing facelets). >>>>> >>>>> Is there any other component that I could misuse for that? >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
