&quot;david.lloyd(a)jboss.com&quot; wrote : Ok, in that case probably it's more appropriate to say: | <h:inputText value="#{var['payment ID']}"/> | | &quot;tom.baeyens(a)jboss.com&quot; wrote : Also I not so sure if a dependency on the runtime environment is a problem if that environment is properly documented and makes use of known technologies. | | But requiring certain beans to be present is a nuicance. I don't want the task forms to be expecting certain managed beans, because this restricts my ability to make changes. | I see. But you have to fix something anyway. Either a bean or a special variable resolver. The var[...] notation is more concise. I have a slight preference for a bean because developers will understand the bean way more rapidly. The special variable resolver might seem like magic. Something which is not appreciated in the post-ejb2 era :-) Afaik, all my arguments are on the table. Now you can just decide what you think is best. &quot;david.lloyd(a)jboss.com&quot; wrote : | <tf:button transition="to receive payments" .../> | ...but still be able to specify all the standard JSF button attributes as well, including images, ID, styleClass, etc. | Yes that solves my problem and is the best solution. As for the task form generation planning, Koen is now finishing a fix for a bug that disabled the task form generation in 3.2.Alpha1. Once that is done, i want to release 3.2.Alpha2 (hopefully before the end of the week). That version should give you a good basis for testing the task forms in the web console. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3984046#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...