[jsr-314-open] Ajax rendering of components among compositions?

[Jim Driscoll]

The only bizzare bit is where the absolute id didn't work - but that's 
explainable in a few ways.

The basic technique - using #{cc.clientId}:subcomponentid to reference 
the rendered id in the ajax calls,  does not seem excessively hard to me.

If you're doing ajax stuff in page, you need to know what the rendered 
id's are going to be.  The minute you start doing anything past hello 
world, you will anyway.

If you disagree with this, having seen the basic demo, then obviously 
I'm wrong, since I'd say you're both more sophisticated than the target 
audience.  So please check that out (jsf-demo/ajax-switchlist), and let 
me know.

Jim

On 5/24/09 7:09 PM, Dan Allen wrote:
> Hmmm, that seems really bizarre. Perhaps this is a bug in Mojarra but
> some chance. Could you distill this down to a basic use case and see if
> Ryan et al can make it a test in Mojarra. If there is a problem with the
> API, then it will be more clearly revealed.
>
>
>         Frankly, for JSF 2.1, I would like to see us go to an XPath-like
>         syntax (or jQuery) to find components because component IDs in
>         JSF just plain suck.
>
>
>     Yup, I agree wholeheartedly, but we need to make it easy to do Ajax
>     rendering across composite components for JSF 2.0. IMO, composite
>     components are by far the single most kickass feature of JSF 2, and
>     if they're crippled, we're gonna get some bad press.
>
>
> No doubt. We definitely can't overlook the foreground problem here.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> Dan Allen
> Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>
> http://mojavelinux.com
> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Dan
>
> NOTE: While I make a strong effort to keep up with my email on a daily
> basis, personal or other work matters can sometimes keep me away
> from my email. If you contact me, but don't hear back for more than a week,
> it is very likely that I am excessively backlogged or the message was
> caught in the spam filters.  Please don't hesitate to resend a message if
> you feel that it did not reach my attention.