I've posted RFE for jsf 2.0 [1] about api for component development.
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=246 2007/3/15, Jörn Zaefferer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Absolutely! The JSF API itself isn't enough to write components without duplicating tons of code. You either do duplication, or depend on a particular implementation of the API. And this isn't just a problem with JSF alone. I wanted to replace the default month renderer on tomahawks schedule component. I've now ended by extending Renderer directly, I can't even reuse a single line of the AbstractWhateverScheduleRenderers. Instead I have to duplicate parts of them in my own renderer. About the three classes: When I want to quickly create my own component for handle a particular problem, I need only the component class itself and my facelets taglib. The component can do the rendering. Once I'd have those components ready to publish to a greater audience I wouldn't mind writing renderer and tag classes. On 3/15/07, Werner Punz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jeff Bischoff schrieb: > > I agree, it would be great if that were part of the distro. Problem > is, > > Facelets still isn't officially supported by Tomahawk, and thus > > developers don't have to ensure their components will work in > Facelets, > > let alone provide the configuration and handler classes. Seems like a > > huge number of the userbase is already using or migrating to Facelets, > > though, so I would expect to see Facelet support improve over time. > This > > is, of course, a community project! > > > Getting away from the discussion itself... > > Actually having facelets in would be a great welcome for the component > devs too, I have been playing around with the thought of having parts > of the stuff I am doing being moved into the facelets domain, sort of > like a tomahawk facelets. > Problem is I cannot do it in the borders of the Tomahawk project > currently because those components would only work with facelets. > (There was a discussion in the myfaces list a while ago) > > I will give a description of the core problem. > > Simple JSF control == 3 classes (one tag class, one component class, one > renderer clasS) > two xml file entries > > each class is 100 locs code min and the renderer uses > a crude servlet like outputwriter api to the worst. > 90% of this code normally is just glue code. > > 90% of most of this code probably could be replaced by simply facelet > tags and only specialized stuff would have to be coded in the component > api itself. > > The component api probably is the biggest problem JSF has in my opinion > and it prevents a lot of people jumping onto the ship. > Facelets would be an easy entry point to add new components. > > > Heck everything which makes things easier and helps people to ease > coding is welcome, it does not have to be facelets. > >
