On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Werner Punz <werner.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually We probably can provide a non facelets based solution > under the myfaces umbrella, tomahawk, extensions or impl I don´t care > but I am definitely sure we will be unable to provide it under > the standard f: tags... > > +1 for a non facelet based solution...
As I was thinking about this bit more. I think we are now there that JSP is officially (almost) dead. When you want to upgrade, by simple replacing the JARs, this will work. Moving forward in your project, by using the new introduced stuff, you have to use Facelets. So, I am +1 for what Ganesh proposed (=> CORE) I am not against an tomahawk:ajax tag, for JSP, if one want's that. -Matthias > > > Werner > > > > Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Ganesh <gan...@j4fry.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Matthias, Simon (K.) and Werner, >> >> no need to name only a few folks. >> Choosing the right subject will bring attention >> to folks that are interested ;-) >> >>> Sorry I need to come back on this again. We had agreed on putting the >>> extension attributes within f:attribute tags nested in f:ajax to avoid >>> compatibility issues with other implementations. In the meantime I >>> realized >>> that f:ajax is a facelets-only tag, so additional tag attributes aren't >> >> :-) it is funny that the core statement was every view needs to be >> supported. >> I can see that some features may only work with Facelets, but a Tag should >> be present for both, JSP(X) and Facelets. Or am I wrong ? >> >>> declared in a taglib, would be ignored by other implementations and >>> cannot >>> be detected by the TCK. So, I changed my mind and now would prefer >>> >>> <f:ajax myfaces="pps:true, queuesize:1"/> >> >> I like that. >> >>> over >>> >>> <f:ajax> >>> <f:attribute name="myfaces_pps" value="true"/> >>> <f:attribute name="myfaces_queuesize" value="1"/> >>> </f:ajax> >>> >>> because the former is less verbose and better readable. >> >> +1 I am with you >> >> -M >> >>> Can you agree with these new arguments? >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Ganesh >>> >> >> >> > > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
