In the current (nightly) version of the calendar, document.write is not used anymore.
regards, Martin On 2/6/06, Tanju Erinmez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew, > > I have come across this topic when analyzing this matter with > InputCalendar but thanks for the info anyway. > When posting my previous answer, I had 3rd party components in mind > which contain non-xhtml conforming javascripts. It's hardly an option > to migrate all of these in normal mode already working components with > a decent effort and then keep up with changes on the original > components. I agree that home grown javascripts should be migrated > accordingly. > > --Tanju > > On 2/6/06, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > FYI -- In regards to the "document.write()" method: > > > > This is not a facelet issue, but a standards issue. document.write is > > deprecated, it should not be used anymore. XHTML is considered XML, not > > HTML. For that reason, document.write doesn't make any sense (writing a > > stream of content to XML). The w3c recommends using the dom structure to > > change XHTML: > > > > 19.1.3. Dynamic modification of documents > > > > Note that the processing model of XML means that the [DOM] method > > document.write cannot be used in XHTML2. To dynamically generate content in > > XHTML you have to add elements to the DOM tree using DOM calls [ DOM] rather > > than using document.write to generate text that then gets parsed. > > > > > > > > > > > > The full document is here: > > > > http://hades.mn.aptest.com/htmlwg/xhtml-m12n-2/xhtml2.html > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > On 2/6/06, Tanju Erinmez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > One major thing that comes to my mind is the fact that the produced > > > output pages are xhtml conform and are transmitted as contenttype > > > text/xhtml+xml by default. This means that javascripts which rely on > > > document.write () things won't work properly (I believe I experienced > > > this with t:inputCalendar). > > > You can circumvent this by explictly overriding the contenttype to > > > text/html in a custom filter or in a overridden FaceletViewHandler. > > > > > > HTH, > > > Tanju > > > > > > > > > On 2/6/06, Yee CN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am thinking of migrating to Facelets and I need to gauge the efforts > > > > required. Assuming that my jsf pages are relatively pure (i.e. no jstl > > etc), > > > > would my pages compile and run as it is without modifications? I got the > > > > impression that this is so – can someone please confirm? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any gotcha to watch out for? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Many thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Yee > > > > > > > > -- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
