actually yes, I am now set up with a jspx extension and jsf to servlet mapping. I just thought faces to jsf was a little more clear. From what I understand jspx is just an xml jsp file, not necessarily a jsf jsp file so I thought *.jsf would be much more clear. This is just from my experiences as a newb and figuring this stuff out. thanks, dean
> No, but why not use .jspx as your file extension? Perhaps the > container only knows how to compile the jsp files properly if you're > using that naming scheme. > > I don't use JSP, so this is all speculation. I did successfully use > jspx files for a short time a year ago before I moved on to facelets, > so I know they work. I'm fairly sure I used a jsf DEFAULT_SUFFIX at > the time with a jspx file extension. > > > On 3/17/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> so it turns out I can't use *.jsf as the file extension if I am already >> using for the filter stuff to go to Faces Servlet. What is bizarre >> though >> is when I start using *.faces as my filter and *.jsf as my file >> extension, >> MyFaces sends back <jsp:root and stuff to the browser instead of >> changing >> everything to html. It does not seem to be processing the *.jsf(JSF >> jsp) >> file. Any one know why? >> thanks, >> dean >> >> > >
