Hello Ed,
I'm still reviewing the spec, and I suspect I will be for the next several
days, but here is the first batch of comments:
* pg 2 - Hyperlink for
http://java.net/jira/browse/JAVASERVERFACES_SPEC_PUBLIC-787 includes a
period at the end
* pg 2 - States the following:
"Yes, this is a backwards incompatible change, but because the usecase is
so specific, and the performance benefit so
substantial, it was judged to be worth the cost."
However, this isn't mentioned in the Backwards Compatibility section.
* pg 5 - Backward Compatibility with Previous Versions
Doesn't backwards compatibility with 2.1 imply compatibly with 2.0?
* pg 3-42 - The following text implies that a page author can only write a
script-based UIComponent implementation, when in fact they can also write a
Java-based one:
"A ValueExpression that evaluates to the component type of the composite
component. By default this is "javax.faces.NamingContainer" but the
composite component page author can change this, or provide a script-based
UIComponent implementation that is required to implement NamingContainer."
* pg 5-9 - Leveraging Java EE Platform Annotations in Managed Beans or
other JSF artifacts
The prose refers to this and other annotations as 'injection annotations".
I'm guessing this is an error, since javax.inject.Named is not an injection
annotation. Also, how would annotations like this be used in conjunction
with JSF managed beans? Is the spec stating that a JSF managed bean can
also be a CDI/Java EE managed bean?
Also, according to this, view-scoped and flow-scoped beans are not eligible
for resource injection. Is that accurate?
___
Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Virtua, Inc. |
http://www.virtua.com | JSF/Java EE training and consulting
http://www.JSFCentral.com - JavaServer Faces FAQ, news, and info |
@jsfcentral
+1 203-404-4848 x246
* Listen to the latest headlines in the JSF and Java EE newscast: *
http://blogs.jsfcentral.com/JSFNewscast/*
* Sign up for the JSFCentral Newsletter:
http://oi.vresp.com/?fid=ac048d0e17