Should the attribute be named "action" to be consistent with UICommand components? (<h:commandButton>). Otherwise, +1
-Dan
On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 18:16 -0400, Dan Allen wrote: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.
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?
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