Jim, which example are you talking about?<br clear="all">---<br>Kito D. Mann -- Author, JavaServer Faces in Action<br><a href="http://twitter.com/kito99">http://twitter.com/kito99</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/jsfcentral">http://twitter.com/jsfcentral</a><br>
<a href="http://www.virtua.com">http://www.virtua.com</a> - JSF/Java EE consulting, training, and mentoring<br><a href="http://www.JSFCentral.com">http://www.JSFCentral.com</a> - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info<br>+1 203-404-4848 x3<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Jim Driscoll <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Jim.Driscoll@sun.com">Jim.Driscoll@sun.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The composite PDL currently has an exmaple component, which takes up a rather large amount of space, and, I feel, doesn't really give a lot of information for someone coming to the technology for the first time.<br>
<br>
At the same time, important information like the specialness of the values "action", "actionListener", "validator", and<br>
"valueChangeListener" are buried in the name attribute of the composite:attribute page.<br>
<br>
I think we might be better served by removing the example (or else, using a much smaller and simpler example), and including information like the special names in that freed space.<br>
<br>
What do you guys think? Am I off base?<br>
<br>
I've filed the following spec issue 572 to track this:<br>
<a href="https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bugcgi?id=572" target="_blank">https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=572</a><br><font color="#888888">
<br>
Jim<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>