That's what I meant Dan... they're not complete by themselves for most environments.  They lack easy theming, and other more advanced features that we expect from more robust components.  They serve as great examples and great prototype components.  I wouldn't tout them as the component set to compete against any of our competitors be any means though! :)

Dan Allen wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Jim Driscoll <Jim.Driscoll@sun.com> wrote:
On 12/10/09 11:30 PM, Ken Paulsen wrote:
* He doesn't like the standard components (i.e. panelGrid) -- Show of
hands, who does? ;) Perhaps we're not stating loudly enough that our
"standard" components are more like "example components". I think w/ JSF
2's ease-of-component-creation, this is even less important... but even
in 1.2 and earlier, we really don't expect the standard components to be
production-components do we?? Apparently he does.

Um, well, I did too.

As did I. Naturally, they look a little naked w/o styling, but still, the base components should be sufficient for doing something. I think you look at your app afterwords and say "man, this could really use some richness". Then you reach for libraries.

-Dan

--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen