Re: [jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] ANNOUNCE: JSF 2.1 Spec, Release Candidate Five
On 11/5/10 2:32 PM, Ed Burns wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 23:33:29 -0700, Ed Burns
<edward.burns(a)oracle.com> said:
>>>>>
The unprefixed namespace, also known as the root namespace, must be
passed through without modification or check for validity. The
passing through of the root namespace must occur on any non-prefixed
element in a facelet page.
Sounds good. (Sounds like we are just specifying behavior that Faclets
has always implemented, right?)
BTW, I see that we still have <h:html> and <h:title> components in the
latest spec. I haven't seen an explanation for why this are
necessary/useful. When I asked about this, you mentioned that <h:html>
was useful as a resource target. However, it is not. From our earlier
thread:
I see. Unfortunately this approach is flawed. The <html>
element may
only contain <head> and <body> elements. As such, "html" is not a
valid target for resource relocation. We need to remove this new
requirement from the 2.1 specification.
If <h:html> cannot serve as a resource target and if <html> is a valid
element in XML processing mode, I am still unclear on the value of
<h:html> and wonder whether this should be included in the 2.1
specification.
On a related note, what's up with <h:title>? :-) Can we kill this
off? Or is there some reason why folks would need to use this instead
of <title>?
I don't remember seeing a response to this, though with all of the
emails lately, I may have missed it.
I still do not understand why our users would use <h:html> and <h:title>
over <html> and <title>. If we don't have a strong reason for why these
components are useful, we should remove these from the specification in
order to avoid spec/component bloat.
Andy