[jsr-314-open] <h:dataTable> binding vs. ui:repeat

[Pete Muir]

On 17 Aug 2009, at 22:40, Ed Burns wrote:

>>>>>> On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:31:51 +0200, Martin Marinschek <mmarinschek at apache.org 
>>>>>> > said:
>
> MM> Hi Lincoln,
>>> Unless I'm mistaken, ui:repeat is not a component and therefore  
>>> cannot
>>> be bound to a backing bean,
>
> MM> I thought it was - and just checked, it derives from  
> UIComponentBase.
> MM> Does the binding attribute not work for you?
>
> Yes, but it's implementation specific and not in the
> javax.faces.component package.
>
> LB> **Question 1: Almost every AJAX framework I know of allows you  
> to simply
> LB> execute a method on the server side, with or without params, and  
> return
> LB> a result... is this possible with JSF's Ajax framework?
>
> Such DWR style functionality was in DynamicFaces, but didn't make it
> into the JSF standard Ajax.
>
>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:10:59 +0100, Pete Muir  
>>>>>> <pmuir at redhat.com> said:
>
> PM> IMO this is not an uncommon use case, and we should support via  
> (1)
>
> Can you please be more specific, Pete?  Which part of LB's mail is not
> an uncommon case?  What is (1)?

I meant, we should provide direct support of the (rough) functionality  
that Lincoln described in saying how others solve Q1.

>
>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:26:14 +0200, Martin Marinschek <mmarinschek at apache.org 
>>>>>> > said:
>
> MM> Hi Dan,
> MM> I did a little research, and it won't work. Therefore I just  
> sent a
> MM> mail out to the JSR-245 spec lead asking for the following  
> signature
> MM> in the EL-resolver - that might help at least a little in  
> providing
> MM> such functionality. And I thought we had discussed that this  
> should
> MM> work at some point of time.
>
> MM>    public Object invoke(ELContext context,
> MM>                          Object base,
> MM>                          Object method,
> MM>                          Class[] formalParamTypes,
> MM>                          Object[] formalParams,
> MM> 			    Class[] parsedParamTypes,
> MM> 			    Object[] parsedParams
> MM> 			    ) {
> MM>         ...
> MM>     }
>
>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:45:45 +0200, Martin Marinschek <mmarinschek at apache.org 
>>>>>> > said:
>
> MM> 1) add a method-attribute to the f:valueChangeListener-tag
>
> You mean, have an attribute that means, "The value of this attribute
> must be a MethodExpression that points to a method that conforms to  
> the
> signature of ValueChangeListener.processValueChange()"?  If so, then  
> yes
> I agree, and we should add it for all the attached objects where it
> makes sense.
>
> MM> 2) get Unified-EL to also support passing the formal parameters  
> (see
> MM> my mail to the spec lead)
>
> Which I still don't understand.  Can you please explain explicitly?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ed
>
>
> -- 
> | ed.burns at sun.com  | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
> | homepage:         | http://ridingthecrest.com/