Anyone else have any ideas? Regards, Maarten -----Original Message----- From: Maarten Dirkse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 4 april 2008 3:38 To: MyFaces Discussion Subject: RE: [Trinidad] Facelets + XHTML breaks Trinidad
Hi Mathias, I was using facelets without <f:view> tags like you said, until I needed them to produce XHTML. Simply setting the doctype declaration XHTML unfortunately doesn't seem to do anything in terms of forcing Trinidad to produce valid markup. As for using <tr:head> etc, I could definitely do that, but it still doesn't give me XHTML. Regards, Maarten PS. Like you, I've also got a layout template that defines all the doctype stuff, and then uses inserts for the pages. I just boiled the problem down to a single page for my question so as to make it as simple as possible to understand. -----Original Message----- From: Mathias Walter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3 april 2008 18:26 To: 'MyFaces Discussion' Subject: RE: [Trinidad] Facelets + XHTML breaks Trinidad Hi Maarten, with Facelets you do not need <f:view>. Yesterday, I run into similar issues regarding to duplicate DOCTYPE tags. I solved it by declaring the DOCTYPE in my .xhtml layout file and avoid using <tr:document>. Instead, I'm using html, trh:head and trh:body inside my global layout template and using ui:composition inside all content files. I'm still porting my application to Facelets, but could solve the initial problems. -- Regards, Mathias > -----Original Message----- > From: Maarten Dirkse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:04 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Trinidad] Facelets + XHTML breaks Trinidad > > > Hi, > I'm migrating an existing JSP project to use facelets, and ran into > the following issue: > > I discovered that the Trinidad renderkit doesn't producing valid XHTML > (at least when used with facelets). More specifically, it wasn't > closing tags like meta, input, link and a bunch of others, which led > to a list of warnings in my validator. (I was a little disappointed as > I believe that, for the sake of enforcing seperation of structure and > presentation, there's no good reason to default to anything but XHTML, > 1.0 strict or transitional.) I went hunting for a solution which I > found in a mail by Matthias who advised using the contentType > attribute on <f:view> (see > http://markmail.org/message/bu6g4s7momu6rifk). > > So I started using <f:view contentType="application/xhtml+xml">, the > mimetype for XHTML, which worked great until I tried to migrate a page > with actual buttons. They simply didn't work anymore. When I switched > the contentType back to "text/html" all the components worked again, > but I was stuck with the same invalid markup that I was trying to > avoid in the first place. > > Anyone have any ideas about how I can get valid XHTML markup *and* > working buttons? The guy who originally asked the question to which > Matthias responded apparently hit upon the same problem but doesn't > appear to have solved it either. > > Here's the markup that I used: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; > xmlns:f="http://java.sun.com/jsf/core"; > xmlns:tr="http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad";> > <head> > <title>Bla</title> > </head> > > <body> > <f:view contentType="application/xhtml+xml"> > <tr:form defaultCommand="searchButton"> > <div id="searchbox"> > <tr:inputText value="#{searchBean.searchValue}" > simple="true" > /> > <tr:commandButton id="searchButton" > action="#{searchBean.searchNow}" text="Search" /> > <strong>#{searchBean.searchResult}</strong> > </div> > </tr:form> > </f:view> > </body> > </html> > > If I change '<f:view contentType="application/xhtml+xml">' to '<f:view > contentType="text/html">', the "Search" button stops working. > Any ideas? > > Regards, > Maarten
