Thanks for the feedback. I will address each one when I return from vacation on Monday.
Ed
David Schneider <david.schneider_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>
>Here are a few items I found while reviewing the latest draft of the
>specification:
>
> * 7.4.2.2 & 7.5.1: Why are flow scoped beans instantiated at flow
> entry rather than at first reference? If all flow scoped beans are
> instantiated at flow entry, regardless of whether they ever get
> referenced by the flow, this could lead to a lot of unnecessary
> object creation and unnecessary memory footprint.
> * 7.5.1: In the description of the first diagram suggest changing
> "task flow return nodes" to "faces flow return nodes".
> * 11.4.3: I'm concerned with the idea that all flows are discovered
> at application start-up and stored in an internal flow data
> structure. This could potentially introduce a lot of memory
> footprint overhead. One of the advantages of using a XML document
> name in the flowId is the flow definition can be discovered on the
> fly, it doesn't have to be already known. I suppose different
> FlowHandler implementations could implement various caching
> strategies in an effort to reduce memory use.
> * 11.4.3.2: This paragraph states a flow definition must be in the
> jar's META-INF/faces-config.xml file. This seems overly
> restrictive. Wouldn't be better to allow the jar file to contain
> multiple flow definition documents with the faces-config.xml
> containing a reference to those documents?
> * 11.4.3.3: Missing word "if". The passage "and such files exist"
> should be "and *if* such files exist".
> * 11.4.3.3: What is the convention for the value of definingDocumentId
> when a flow is implicitly defined by a directory? Is it the
> convention described in section 7.4.2.1?
>
>Dave
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.