jsr344-experts@javaserverfaces-spec-public.java.net

[jsr344-experts] Re: PRD Review and pending issues

From: Leonardo Uribe <lu4242_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:47:52 -0500

Hi Frank

2013/1/16 Frank Caputo <frank_at_frankcaputo.de>:
> Hi Leonardo,
>
> Am 15.01.2013 um 20:37 schrieb Leonardo Uribe <lu4242_at_gmail.com>:
>
>> Thinking about this, I think a good idea could be add a method to
>> Resource interface to get the last modified time.
>>
>> public Long getLastModified()
>>
>> return null if no lastModified time can be returned.
>
> This method would be really helpful, but I wouldn't allow null to be returned, so I'd use the primitive long as return value.
>

Ok. good to know that. The idea of the null is to know when there is
no lastModified time, but maybe a -1 is better.

> There will be an issue with decorating existing resources and overwriting only getLastModified. userAgentNeedsUpdate and getResponseHeaders won't call the decorated version of getLastModified. So on decorated resources all 3 methods must be implemented, which is not very comfortable.
>

The same hypotethical issue exists between userAgentNeedsUpdate and
getResponseHeaders too, but the important consideration is how often
is required to modify the last modified time? For "static" resources
it will be always the same value, so the wrapper will not modify them.
For resources that needs to be generated once (css + inner EL
expressions), the same consideration applies (will not be modified).
Resource instances like the one required by a captcha component (an
image that is generated in a unique way per session), will have
different implementations in those methods (usually getResponseHeaders
return null userAgentNeedsUpdate return true and getLastModified
return 0 or -1).

In conclusion, in my opinion we shouldn't worry about that detail,
because once these methods are defined, by the "nature" of the
underlying Resource those implementations does not change.

> Ciao Frank
>
>> 2013/1/15 Frank Caputo <frank_at_frankcaputo.de>:
>>> Hi Leonardo,
>>>
>>> I recently provided a patch for Mojarra to solve this problem, which Manfred merged into the trunk ( http://java.net/projects/mojarra/sources/svn/diff/trunk/jsf-ri/src/main/java/com/sun/faces/facelets/impl/DefaultFacelet.java?rev1=11384&rev2=11385 ).
>
> Does this answer obsolete your older comments on resource library contracts?
>

No. I think use the alias for the calculation is not the right way to
do it, because the alias has another different meaning. For example,
in MyFaces the alias is prefixed according if is a facelet, view
metadata facelet or a composite component facelet. If I remember well,
the alias was used in the id generation, but I changed that part in
MyFaces with a better concept ( faceletId ). So, in MyFaces at the end
the "alias" is used only as debug information.

In this case, DefaultFacelet must be modified to store the contextual
library / resource and use that information to derive a relative
resource. Suppose a composite component located in
META-INF/resources/my.composite.component/simplecc.xhtml . It there is
a reference to

<ui:include src="dir1/resource.xhtml"/>

The resource should be located in:

libraryName: my.composite.component
resourceName: dir1/resource.xhtml

Going back to the base example, if there is a file under
/templates/b.xhtml with a reference to:

<ui:decorate template="dir2/mytemplate2.xhml">

The resource should be located in:

libraryName: N/A
resourceName: /templates/dir2/mytemplate2.xhtml

Note if there is a resource in
META-INF/resources/templates/dir2/mytemplate2.xhtml, the resource
should not be taken into account (or maybe yes), because what we want
is resolve the resource in a relative way. The resolution process
inside a composite component is different than the resolution from a
template, but if the call is located inside a template called from a
composite component, it is relative to the composite component
library.

Really this part is still open to interpretation, and it is clear we
need to get to an agreement about how this should work.

regards,

Leonardo Uribe

> Ciao Frank
>
>>>
>>> I'll answer more detailed tomorrow.
>>>
>>> Ciao Frank
>>>
>>> Am 15.01.2013 um 00:32 schrieb Leonardo Uribe <lu4242_at_gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Right now, facelets derive the path using a call to:
>>>>
>>>> new URL(from, path)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>