This version of the spec doesn't seem to include a number of topics we have been discussing the past few weeks, including page parameters and Ajax changes (to better run in a portlet environment). When do you expect a review draft that includes these more recent changes? For the draft I have the following few comments: 1. Until I hear a yeah or nay I would like to continue to recommend the changes I proposed making javax.faces.component.UIViewRoot a NamingContainer that implements portlet namespacing when run/accessed in portlet requests. 2. Section 14.1 (Ajax): its not clear whether any hidden fields other than javax.faces.ViewState are included in ajax requests by jsf.ajax.getViewState. The HTML successful controls doc says they may be included but that seems too loose. Portlets need some accommodation to support the following use case: An Ajax using JSF portlet is included in an Ajax using JSF consumer page by a consumer defined process that inlines the portlet. By inlining I mean the consumer parses the portlet markup, removes/rewrites the target of <form> elements as hidden fields (to avoid the embeded form problem), and namespaces all the form's fields so that when the consumers page is submitted it can decode those fields pertaining to this portlet. The outcome of this process is the hidden field name = "javax.faces.ViewState" is rewriten as name = "ns:javax.faces.ViewState". When the overall page is submitted we need to ensure this hidden field is submitted whenever any of the portlet's input fields would also be submitted. One easy way to do this is to submit all the hidden fields as part of the form state. Note: if we make progress on the active discussion regarding namespacing this field, the 3. Section 14.2.3: typo -- the description references jsf.viewState but it looks like it means to reference jsf.getViewState. -Mike- Roger Kitain wrote: