On 11/22/05, Nwokoma, Sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Craig, > Thank you a lot for your reply. I respect you a lot so it is with all > due respect that I asking this: why crave out an entire new framework as > shale when JSF should have been extended to take care of whatever shale > represents.
For the long term, I absolutely agree with you ... and Shale will certainly serve as good "research and development" for what should be standardized in JSF 2.0. For JSF 1.0, we were already later than we should have been, so we stopped at the basic component APIs in order to get the thing out the door. If we'd waited until the spec was "complete" (in the sense of including all the application framework stuff), it *still* would not be done. I am learning shale, and I am grudging about having to code > the tags--something I do not have to do with Java Studio Creator for > JSF. My thinking is that Creator should be extended to enable developers > to choose whether to develop JSF specific or Shale specific application. > What do you think? > Oma. Personally, I think that would be a great idea :-). However, I would suggest a slight terminology change, because every Shale app is also "JSF specific". It would be more an issue of "do you want to use the Shale value add features *in addition to* those of pure JSF. Oma Sampson > DPSCS > IT Systems Technical Specialist > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig
