[jsr-314-open] [JSF 2.1 NEW] composite component namespace simplification

[Jason Lee]

On 12/10/09 8:29 PM, Jim Driscoll wrote:
> I would prefer jsf:composite:jim for components under resources/jim, 
> and jsf:composite:comp/jim for components under resources/comp/jim.  
> Two characters might not seem like a lot, but why not use jsf instead 
> of faces if it signifies the same thing to users and is shorter?  (We 
> already use "jsf" in the Ajax library.)
That thought occurred to me, but I didn't have any good reason to bring 
it up, but I think you have a pretty good point there. :)

> Further, in the interest of brevity, why say "composite"?  Why not 
> match the implicit EL object and just say "cc"?
>
> Thus:
>
> xmlns:jim="jsf:cc:jim"
>
> Isn't that just as clear to someone who already knows what #{cc} is?
>
> Concerned that it's too cryptic?  Look at the first part of that 
> phrase.  Anyone think that the XML standards guys should have called 
> it xmlnamespace instead of xmlns?
>
> Shorter is almost always better, especially for frequently typed 
> boilerplate.
+1 on all that :P

-- 
Jason Lee, SCJP
President, Oklahoma City Java Users Group
Senior Java Developer, Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.steeplesoft.com