Werner Punz schrieb: > Matthias Wessendorf schrieb: >> 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... >> >> yeah. I know. I am really wondering why the "support all views" ship >> sailed away. >> Again, I understand that some solutions may only fly in Facelets land... >> >> That said, but wasn't the promised goal of the formal/current EG that >> a flexible ViewLayer was >> the KEY ? ==> Swing-based RenderKit etc ? Or is this (JSF) just another >> web-framework ? >> > Well the entire ajax part makes only sense in the web domain. > f:ajax definitely is not suitable for swing and others.
Why doesn't partial-page-updating make sense for presentation layers other than HTML? If a JSF renderkit was to generate some special markup that a client app (browser replacement) then created swing components from, that submitting part of the page (a subset of the swing widgets) would still be a useful thing to do, wouldn't it? Is the JSF2.0 PPR-related spec designed to handle this, ie is the response message structured so that a non-browser can still interpret it correctly? As long as the response contains just XML with component ids and values, it seems that this would work ok... Cheers, Simon
