That sounds good to me.
Phil.
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Edward Burns" <edward.burns_at_oracle.com>
> To: jsr344-experts_at_javaserverfaces-spec-public.java.net
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:29:05 PM
> Subject: [jsr344-experts] Re: [1089-PassThroughAttributes] JSON dependency: OK?
>
> On 6/26/12 1:26 PM, Edward Burns wrote:
>
> EB> I need those of you that feel strongly that we should have JSON
> support
> EB> to voice their opinion here because requiring JSON means an
> additional
> EB> library dependency.
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:34:39 -0400, Andy Schwartz
> >>>>> <andy.schwartz_at_oracle.com> said:
>
> AS> Is JSR 353 (Java API for JSON Processing) going to make it into
> the Java
> AS> EE7 spec? If so, perhaps we should consider holding off on
> introducing
> AS> a JSON dependency until we can rely on this standard API.
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:25:50 +0200, Werner Keil
> >>>>> <werner.keil_at_gmail.com> said:
>
> WK> Guess only Linda and other EE 7 Leaders know for sure.
> WK> I am 353 EG Member, but have not seen any activity there yet.
>
> On 6/28/12 9:29 AM, Kito Mann wrote:
>
> KM> I think this is probably worth it, since there are so few
> dependencies
> KM> already. One of my clients does some custom JSON parsing; they
> were
> KM> using the libraries that ship with WAS, but now they use the ones
> KM> included with PrimeFaces. However, I've worked with several
> clients
> KM> that wouldn't go down that path.
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 09:58:50 -0400, Andy Schwartz
> >>>>> <andy.schwartz_at_oracle.com> said:
>
> AS> Fortunately, jsr-353 is addressing exactly this use case. Not
> sure
> AS> whether JSF should itself force this dependency now, or hold off
> a bit
> AS> until jsr-353 is integrated into the Java EE platform. Of
> course, if
> AS> jsr-353 isn't going to make it for Java EE7, I would be more
> tempted to
> AS> force the dependency.
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT), Phil Webb
> >>>>> <pwebb_at_vmware.com> said:
>
> PW> I would prefer to not see a mandatory dependency but don't have a
> PW> big problem with optional dependency. Still, my gut feeling is
> that
> PW> adding a jsonToMap() function is something that the developer
> should
> PW> be doing themselves for now rather than being provided.
>
> PW> Perhaps in the future, when JSR-353 is final,
> passThroughAttributes
> PW> could be changed to support JSON Strings directly?
>
> I'm in the process of finding out the status of JSR-353 relative to
> EE7.
>
> In the meantime, I propose we modify the spec for this function to
> say
> that it is only required to work in containers that have a JSON
> parser
> available. Given how strongly the community feels about this, and
> how
> isolated and self-contained it is, I'd like to leave it in.
>
> Does that sound good?
>
> Ed
>
> --
> | edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
> | homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/
> | 15 Business days til JSF 2.2 Public Review to EG
>