Should the attribute be named "action" to be consistent with UICommand
components? (<h:commandButton>). Otherwise, +1
-Dan
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 18:16 -0400, Dan Allen wrote:
I don't get it. Why are JSR-299 and JSR-330 allowed to change so
drastically before Java EE 6, yet we need one small change in EL and it
can't happen. This is crap. If we all agree this change would be valuable, I
want to see it included. Whose arm do we have to twist?
For now, I'd still like to see the <f:valueChangeListener
method="..."> and
<f:actionListener method="..."> attributes provided, even if the
ValueChangeEvent and ActionEvent parameters are lost. This functionality is
important to provide even at a basic level, in my opinion. This would put
the listener functionality in a more consistent place with the action method
functionality on commandLink and commandButton.
The full functionality can be addressed at a later date when it becomes
possible through EL.
The issue is:
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=612
--Lincoln
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan