>>>>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:05:23 +0100, Frank Caputo <frank_at_frankcaputo.de> said:
EB> CONDITIONALLY_RESOLVED: How are contracts made available to the
EB> application.
EB> This is where I bring in the syntax from Manfred I mentioned earlier.
EB> If we have a resource-library-contracts element in the application
EB> configuration resources, any mappings and contract declarations it has
EB> are added to the data structure of such things for the application.
[...]
FC> I still think, we don't need a configuration option, because
FC> possible use cases differ too much.
FC> And as you said before: The JSF spec is already gigantic ;-)
EB>
EB> CONDITIONALLY_RESOLVED: Add new method on ViewDeclarationLanguage:
EB>
EB> public List<String> calculateResourceLibraryContracts(
EB> FacesContext context, String viewId);
EB>
EB> This method takes the argument viewId and uses the data structure to
EB> find the list of contracts that should be applied.
FC> As stated in another mail: I'd like to have it on ViewHandler
FC> without the viewId.
FC> You can't obtain the VDL without a viewId. But you might need to be
FC> able to calculate it without a viewId. MyFaces' ResourceHandlerImpl
FC> can calculate the locale prefix without a view. So let's use the
FC> same behavior and put the new method on the ViewHandler.
LU> +1 to use ViewHandler. Even if some VDL does not implement this feature, it
LU> is clearly a view related concept.
I want to argue for having it in VDL. Let me remind you why we invented
VDL in the first place: to give a home to concerns related to the View
Declaration Language, meaning Facelets. The ViewHandler doesn't know
anything about the internal structure of a view, for example, how to
take an XML file and create a tree of UIComponent instances from it.
The VDL impl *does* know about that sort of thing.
Ed
--
| edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/