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

Tue Jan 12 10:37:03 EST 2010

Once again, I'm reviving an older thread. So glad to be able to post again! :-)

When running in a portlet environment, it is forbidden for a JSF portlet to render tags like <head> and <body>. Tags like that are controlled by the portlet container, when aggregating portlet fragments into a complete HTML document.

So I think it would be better to have the page author to explicitly specify h:head and h:body. If they specify plain old <head> and <body> then the portlet container will likely strip them out. Currently, we can override the renderers for h:head and h:body in a portlet bridge in order to have them not render those tags.

Neil

On Dec 15, 2009, at 3:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:

> I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would that be too overreaching?
> 
> Lincoln Baxter III
> http://ocpsoft.com
> http://scrumshark.com
> Keep it simple.
> 
> 
>> On Dec 15, 2009 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 l...
>> 
>> +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.
>> 
>> 
>> david 
>> > > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com > http://scrumshark.com > Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
>> 
>> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jsr-314-open-mirror/attachments/20100112/e50033d2/attachment.html 