[jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] [902-ViewDeclarationLanguageSelection] (was: Re: 490-XmlViews Processing JSPX files as Facelets)

[Ed Burns]

This is targeted for 2.2.  

>>>>> On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:20:22 -0500, Leonardo Uribe <lu4242 at gmail.com> said:
LU>      <faces-config-extension>
LU>        <vdl-configuration>
LU>          <vdl-id>facelets</vdl-id>
LU>          <vdl-class>xxx.yyy.zzz.MyCustomFaceletsVDLWrapper</vdl-class>
LU>          <vdl-global-resource-mapping>
LU>             <file-extension>.jspx</file-extension>
LU>             <vdl-resource-mapping-config> <!-- Saved on key/value map or
LU> something like that -->
LU>                 <process-as>jspx</process-as>
LU>             </vdl-resource-mapping-config>
LU>          </vdl-global-resource-mapping>
LU>          <vdl-global-resource-mapping>
LU>             <file-extension>.view.xml</file-extension>
LU>             <vdl-resource-mapping-config> <!-- Saved on key/value map or
LU> something like that -->
LU>                 <process-as>xml</process-as>
LU>             </vdl-resource-mapping-config>
LU>          </vdl-global-resource-mapping>
LU>        </vdl-configuration>
LU>      </faces-config-extension>

LU>     It is almost the same as we have before but with the following
LU> differences:

LU>     1. Every VDL has an id (like with RenderKit)
LU>     2. There is an option to provide custom properties, that allow pass the
LU> "mode".
LU>     3. <vdl-global-resource-mapping> tag says "... all resources that match
LU> this mapping
LU>        in the webapp will be processed by this VDL using these configuration
LU> params  ..."
LU>     4. (Optional) Allow to provide a wrapper for a VDL implementation,
LU> allowing to extend
LU>        it (maybe useful for gracelets????).

LU> Did you see the relationship between all three problems?

LU> - All of them require changes on
LU> ViewDeclarationLanguage/ViewDeclarationLanguageFactory.
LU> - Problem (1) is enough simple to solve, because it just require some code
LU> relocation that already exists,
LU>   but it is necessary to update the spec.
LU> - Problem (2) is the general case of (3), so we just need to change the
LU> current patch a little bit.
LU> - To make (3) and use it as expected we need (1) fixed.

LU> I'm willing to contribute with this issue doing some code if necessary (I'll
LU> try it to see how
LU> far I can go).

LU> Suggestions are welcome.

LU> best regards,

[1] https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=902

-- 
| edward.burns at oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| homepage:               | http://ridingthecrest.com/
|  8 work days until German Oracle User's Group Conference