[jsr-314-open] AJAX library in JSF 2.0

[Alaxander Smirnov]

I think Dan paint too dark picture about "dump in the kitchen sink" JSF 
2.0 AJAX implementation library. I always kept in mind during AJAX API 
development to make it flexible and extensible to give us and other 
independent vendors place for innovations. From my point of view, the 
most important thing to use the same Java and JavaScript API for all 
component libraries to keep them interoperable.
But, it also seems for me that using only one implementation ( or two ? 
) is not very productive. Different component vendors could have a 
different release plans, different extensions and requirements. Also, 
because core JSF libraries supposed to be integrated into container, in 
many cases it would be much hard to application developers to change 
implementation version instead of component library. Also, Mojarra ( and 
MyFaces ) teams have limited resources, that cam slow down propagation 
of features to implementation. So, the best strategy for JSF AJAX 
development would be extensions from different vendors that could be 
fine tested by their developers and community. JSF implementation 
library should adopt the best solutions as it already done for JSF 2.0 
AJAX API.
Of course, any extensions should be compatible with public API, and any 
components should relay for that API only, so it is up to application 
developer that implementation to use.

On 09/14/2009 07:48 AM, Roger Kitain wrote:
> Hey Pete -
>
> Thanks for the clarification - that's what I thought based on prior 
> discussions I've
> had with Alex.  Yes, ICEFaces had done some preliminary work with JSF 
> 2.0:
> http://www.java.net/blog/2009/05/25/icefaces-20-and-jsf-20-together
> And I'm sure ADF Faces will follow suite (if they haven't started 
> already).
>
> -roger
>
> Pete Muir wrote:
>>
>> On 13 Sep 2009, at 22:53, Jim Driscoll wrote:
>>
>>>> I hope that AJAX4JSF is modified so that it builds on top of the JSF
>>>> standardized APIs instead of being a complete replacement for them.
>>>
>>> That's something that can best to achieved by their customers 
>>> lobbying the AJAX4JSF people.
>>>
>>> AFAIK, there's nothing to stop them specifically from adopting the 
>>> current API set - other than their reluctance to rewrite an existing 
>>> codebase.  But that's based on the one link that you sent on - you'd 
>>> have to ask them directly if that's true.
>>
>> Essentially this is the opposite of the RichFaces 4 plan (I agree, 
>> the comment that this discussion is based on is ambiguous at best). 
>> Just like ICEFaces, we intend to build RichFaces 4.0 on top of the 
>> JSF 2 Ajax API. I've asked Jay (RichFaces project lead) to blog in 
>> detail on this to clear up the confusion :-)
>>
>> From initial discussions with Alex, my understanding is JSF 2 Ajax 
>> will account for around 70% of what was in Ajax4JSF (which IMO just 
>> validates how complete JSF 2 Ajax is!). The remaining 20% has not 
>> been specified (not ready yet, or no consensus or ...), and will be 
>> built as extensions on top of JSF 2 Ajax.
>>
>> HTH
>