[jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>

Tue Dec 15 21:42:45 EST 2009

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM, David Geary <clarity.training at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com>
>
>> It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would automatically
>> add/detect he right place to link scripts & stylesheets.
>>
>> I'm all for almost anything that removes developer responsibilities and
>> makes jsf easier to use.
>>
> +1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to coordinate with
> resource relocation from h:outputScript and h:outputStylesheet, but it would
> be great if you could just use <head> and <body> instead, and have
> everything work.
>

+1. The first time I saw the resource relocation in a presentation, I
immediately wondered why we weren't creating head and body components
implicitly (if not explicitly specified). It's not a performance hit, as
Imre points out further down, because Facelets was designed to be able to
find tags (it uses a SAX parser after all). There should be no need for
scanning.

Issue #700, WOOT! (I don't know why I am excited about that, just seems
significant)

https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=700

-Dan

-- 
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20091215/392fcf55/attachment.html 