Ed, All - I have finally started reviewing the pdf, including the new chapter 11: "The JSF XML View Syntax". Unfortunately, while reviewing this chapter I felt very lost. The chapter opens with: I didn't realize that we were introducing a new VDL. I thought that our efforts have been focused on allowing the existing Facelets VDL to be more XML-friendly by providing control over XML processing behavior. The differences that we have been discussing between legacy xhtml-centric Facelets and the new xml-centric approach are related to processing of XML-centric constructs such as CDATA blocks, XML declarations, processing instructions, etc... I didn't realize that we would also be changing how HTML template text/tags were handled. If this means that you cannot use HTML elements in the new XML views, my guess is that nobody will be interested in adopting this approach. One small but important feature that folks seemed to like about Facelets is that it made the <f:view> optional. If we now require a new top-level element, my guess is that many people will find this to be a step backwards. I find section 11.2, "Java Programming Language Specification for Faces XML Views" to be overly detailed and difficult to read, eg: I am surprised that we need to go into this level of detail. Perhaps the problem is that I am not a JSF implementor and as such I don't appreciate why this sort of detail is necessary. I also worry that this is information that must be available elsewhere (eg. for the Facelets VDL), in which case we don't have a single source of truth. Could the MyFaces guys comment on whether this level of detail in section 11.2 is helpful to you as JSF implementors? The big picture problem that I have with the information in chapter 11 is that I do not understand how this relates to xhtml/xml/facelets processing mode that we have been discussing in detail over the last few weeks. I did not realize that a new VDL was necessary. I thought that our focus was on configuring how Facelets processes documents that are mapped to the Facelets VDL. I would prefer that we focus on the approach that is currently outlined in Apendix A, section 1.2.1.1 ("The facelets-processing element") and avoid introducing a new VDL as described in chapter 11. BTW, if we are introducing a new VDL, one thing that is missing is any mention of how to map views to this VDL - ie. there is no equivalent of the javax.faces.FACELETS_VIEW_MAPPINGS. Though based on the concerns that Leonardo raised on our other active thread, rather than introduce additional context parameters for this sort of thing, we should look into a generic faces-config-based VDL registration mechanism. Andy