> >That is only true for things defined as "component". Things defined as
> "component" are top-level. That really means that they are an entry in the
> Map
> that caches the digested XML file.
> >
> >When you use the jsfid for an "element", it kind of works like and a java
> anonymous class. It is assumed that you are extending a top-level
> component
> by that jsfid. The attributes defined for that element will override the
> ones
> defined by the component and inheritance will also apply. Elements are the
> composition glue for creating complex components.
> >
> yes
> but as I understand components defined in html template can't be bound
> to elements - just to top level components ;(
> may be it will be possible to use top-level components as jsf views ?
> e.g
>
[snippet]
>
>
> I think it will be very flexible. what do you think?
>
That's an interesting idea. Currently, when using full html views, the view id
(uri) is assumed to be the jsfid and this can only correspond to a HTML
template.
This is similar to a tiles customization I've seen in Struts 1.1. A
customized request processor intercepted the forward in the
"processForwardConfig" and provided a mapping layer injecting a new forward
name based on a customer branding.
What about creating a viewId to jsfid mapping. We could extend the Clay config
file. Maybe something like this?
<dispatch>
<mapping viewId="/profile.clay" jsfid="profile"/>
<mapping viewId="/main.clay" jsfid="main"/>
</dispatch>
Gary
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
