Thanks. But I think from what I have been reading these days that Facelet is a JSF solution only (it would be tightly integrated to the JSF rendering mechanism). Tiles 2 is generic to any web based application.
On Dec 5, 2007 9:29 AM, Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you're going to use JSF, don't use JSP with it - it just doesn't work > that well. Facelets is much better. > http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-facelets/index.html > > Matt > > On Dec 5, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Carlos Ortiz wrote: > > Interesting. I think I should evaluate this items. > Sorry for the person that eMailed you about Facelets item. > JSF/Facelet. Is this new? How is it used? > > On Dec 5, 2007 12:04 AM, Matt Raible < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yes, it's true that SiteMesh does not work seamlessly with JSF. > > However, there's nothing saying it's not possible. > > > > http://raibledesigns.com/rd/entry/sitemesh_works_with_jsf > > > > Someone e-mailed me a couple of weeks ago saying he got the following > > working with Facelets, but I haven't heard back from him since. > > > > Tiles will likely integrate better with JSF - but Facelets also has > > built-in composition support. > > > > Matt > > > > On Nov 13, 2007 6:40 AM, Carlos Ortiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This a question I have been willing to ask. I am using the SiteMesh > > library > > > for page decoration and in some place I read that this does not work > > > seamlessly with JSF, is this true or false? Does Tiles have this very > > same > > > problem? > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://raibledesigns.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >
