2:04 p.m.
I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would that be too
overreaching?
Lincoln Baxter III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
Keep it simple.
On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary" <clarity.training(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com>
> It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
automatically
add/detect he right place to l...
+1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to coordinate with
resource relocation from h:outputScript and h:outputStylesheet, but it would
be great if you could just use <head> and <body> instead, and have
everything work.
david
> Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com >
http://scrumshark.com > Keep
it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
3:26 p.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
Could someone please file this as a spec RFE?
We'll have to do a performance test to really see the implications, but
it does seem like it would be useful to have this.
Jim
On 12/15/09 12:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would
that be too
overreaching?
Lincoln Baxter III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
Keep it simple.
> On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary" <clarity.training(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> 2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>>
>
> > > It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
automatically
> add/detect he right place to l...
>
> +1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to coordinate with
> resource relocation from h:outputScript and h:outputStylesheet, but it
> would be great if you could just use <head> and <body> instead, and
> have everything work.
>
>
> david
>
> > > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com > http://scrumshark.com >
> Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
>
>
3:38 p.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
2009/12/15 Jim Driscoll <Jim.Driscoll(a)sun.com>
Could someone please file this as a spec RFE?
Lincoln?!? You were the last to respond, buddy. :)
david
We'll have to do a performance test to really see the implications, but it
does seem like it would be useful to have this.
Jim
On 12/15/09 12:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
> I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would that be too
> overreaching?
>
> Lincoln Baxter III
> http://ocpsoft.com
> http://scrumshark.com
> Keep it simple.
>
> On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary" <clarity.training(a)gmail.com
>> <mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
>> <mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>>
>>
>>
>> > > It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
automatically
>> add/detect he right place to l...
>>
>> +1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to coordinate with
>> resource relocation from h:outputScript and h:outputStylesheet, but it
>> would be great if you could just use <head> and <body> instead, and
>> have everything work.
>>
>>
>> david
>>
>> > > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com > http://scrumshark.com
>
>> Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
>>
>>
>>
10:21 a.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
I've filed this as "Implicit Resource Relocation":
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=702
-roger
David Geary wrote:
2009/12/15 Jim Driscoll <Jim.Driscoll(a)sun.com
<mailto:Jim.Driscoll@sun.com>>
Could someone please file this as a spec RFE?
Lincoln?!? You were the last to respond, buddy. :)
david
We'll have to do a performance test to really see the
implications, but it does seem like it would be useful to have this.
Jim
On 12/15/09 12:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would that
be too
overreaching?
Lincoln Baxter III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
Keep it simple.
On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary"
<clarity.training(a)gmail.com
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>>> wrote:
2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>>>
> > It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
automatically
add/detect he right place to l...
+1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to
coordinate with
resource relocation from h:outputScript and
h:outputStylesheet, but it
would be great if you could just use <head> and <body>
instead, and
have everything work.
david
> > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com >
http://scrumshark.com >
Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
Thanks Roger!
david
2009/12/16 Roger Kitain <Roger.Kitain(a)sun.com>
I've filed this as "Implicit Resource Relocation":
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=702
-roger
David Geary wrote:
> 2009/12/15 Jim Driscoll <Jim.Driscoll(a)sun.com <mailto:
> Jim.Driscoll(a)sun.com>>
>
>
> Could someone please file this as a spec RFE?
>
>
> Lincoln?!? You were the last to respond, buddy. :)
>
>
> david
>
>
> We'll have to do a performance test to really see the
> implications, but it does seem like it would be useful to have this.
>
> Jim
>
>
> On 12/15/09 12:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>
> I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would that
> be too
> overreaching?
>
> Lincoln Baxter III
> http://ocpsoft.com
> http://scrumshark.com
> Keep it simple.
>
> On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary"
> <clarity.training(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>
> <mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com
> <mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> 2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>
> <mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com
>
> <mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>>>
>
>
> > > It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
> automatically
> add/detect he right place to l...
>
> +1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to
> coordinate with
> resource relocation from h:outputScript and
> h:outputStylesheet, but it
> would be great if you could just use <head> and <body>
> instead, and
> have everything work.
>
>
> david
>
> > > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com >
> http://scrumshark.com >
> Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
>
>
>
>
4:18 p.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
Sorry guys. Had limited connection to the world for the past few days :)
My droid doesn't like java.net issue tracker -- who wants to write an
app??? ;)
Thanks Roger!
---
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
"Keep it Simple"
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 09:25 -0700, David Geary wrote:
Thanks Roger!
david
2009/12/16 Roger Kitain <Roger.Kitain(a)sun.com>
I've filed this as "Implicit Resource Relocation":
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=702
-roger
David Geary wrote:
2009/12/15 Jim Driscoll <Jim.Driscoll(a)sun.com
<mailto:Jim.Driscoll@sun.com>>
Could someone please file this as a spec RFE?
Lincoln?!? You were the last to respond, buddy. :)
david
We'll have to do a performance test to really see
the
implications, but it does seem like it would be
useful to have this.
Jim
On 12/15/09 12:04 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
I'd even like to see it add <head> if not
provided. Would that
be too
overreaching?
Lincoln Baxter III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
Keep it simple.
On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary"
<clarity.training(a)gmail.com
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com
<mailto:clarity.training@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III
<lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com
<mailto:lincolnbaxter@gmail.com>>>
> > It would be nice if it "just worked",
and jsf would
automatically
add/detect he right place to l...
+1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as
necessary to
coordinate with
resource relocation from h:outputScript and
h:outputStylesheet, but it
would be great if you could just use <head>
and <body>
instead, and
have everything work.
david
> > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com
>
http://scrumshark.com >
Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
6:01 p.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Lincoln Baxter III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com
wrote:
Sorry guys. Had limited connection to the world for the past few
days :)
My droid doesn't like java.net issue tracker -- who wants to write an
app??? ;)
Your droid isn't the only being that doesn't like Bugzilla ;)
-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
5:41 p.m.
New subject: [jsr-314-open] [jsf2.next] <h:head> vs. <head>
If you automatically add a head you would have to add some generic or
implicit title too, so I think the head and title should be added by
the template author always.
(Also while I haven't used DreamWeaver for years now, the last time I
used it, while it was forgiving on custom-tags, it constantly added
html,head,title and body to make it a HTML-Page)
to have <head> and <body> be translated to h:head and h:body you just
have to provide a Facelet TagDecorator (about 15-25 loc) (for now it
can be added in web.xml) that will replace these two tags at template
compilation time, so the performance hit should be minimal.
So the question is, should that TagDecorator be part of an
implementation (or in case it is part of an implementation, should it
be part of the compiler, as then there is no need to have it in a
Decorator)
Imre
On 15.12.2009, at 21:04, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
I'd even like to see it add <head> if not provided. Would
that be
too overreaching?
Lincoln Baxter III
http://ocpsoft.com
http://scrumshark.com
Keep it simple.
> On Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM, "David Geary" <clarity.training(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 2009/12/15 Lincoln Baxter, III <lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com>
> > > It would be nice if it "just worked", and jsf would
> automatically add/detect he right place to l...
>
> +1. I always pitch h:head and h:body as necessary to coordinate
> with resource relocation from h:outputScript and
> h:outputStylesheet, but it would be great if you could just use
> <head> and <body> instead, and have everything work.
>
>
> david
> > > Lincoln Baxter III > http://ocpsoft.com > http://scrumshark.com
> > Keep it simple. >> >> On Dec 1...
>
>
5506
days inactive
5508
days old
jsr-314-open-mirror@lists.jboss.org
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Dan Allen -
David Geary -
Imre Osswald -
Jim Driscoll -
Lincoln Baxter III -
Lincoln Baxter, III
-
Roger Kitain