+1
Ciao Frank
Am 29.06.2012 um 06:42 schrieb Phil Webb:
> 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
>>
>