[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12585251#action_12585251
]
Brian Kates commented on MYFACES-1834:
--------------------------------------
I also disagree with the priority on this issue. This is a major show stopper
for anyone that uses Tiles.
> suffix added to component id when including files
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MYFACES-1834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1834
> Project: MyFaces Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JSR-252
> Affects Versions: 1.2.2
> Reporter: Simon Kitching
> Priority: Minor
>
> In core 1.2 to 1.2.2, any use of jsp:include causes the ids of components in
> the included file to have a random string appended to them.
> This results in some ugly ids. However more significantly, the id of a
> component is not predictable even when an id attribute is explicitly assigned.
> In addition, this breaks the tomahawk forceId feature, because although the
> namespace prefix is omitted the rest of the id changes making "forceId"
> useless.
> The cause is class UIComponentClassicTagBase, where checkIfItIsInAnIterator()
> returns true if the current component is in an included or forwarded page.
> Later, the createUniqueId method adds a suffix to the user-specified if
> member isInAnIterator is true.
> Unfortunately, documentation on why things are implemented as they are is
> lacking.
> Checking for iteration is needed to support
> <c:forEach ..>
> <h:inputText id="name"/>
> </c:forEach>
> Checking for includedOrForwarded might be to allow:
> <jsp:include page="subPage.jsp" />
> <jsp:include page="subPage.jsp" />
> However this is a very rare usage; support for this should not hurt everyone.
> And Sun Mojarra does *not* mess with the ids like this...testing shows
> that the ids of components are the same regardless of whether they are
> inline or in an included file.
> Maybe the "isInIterator" check could look to see whether the *same file* is
> being included twice, eg by keeping a list of the files included so far, and
> returning true only if the same string is encountered twice? That would allow
> multiple inclusions, but not mess with ids for a single inclusion.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
