+1
___
Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
Virtua, Inc. |
http://www.virtua.com | JSF/Java EE training and consulting
http://www.JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral
+1 203-998-0403
* Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: *http://w
<
http://blogs.jsfcentral.com/JSFNewscast/>ww.enterprisejavanews.com
<
http://ww.enterprisejavanews.com>*
* JSFCentral Interviews Podcast:
http://www.jsfcentral.com/resources/jsfcentralpodcasts/
* Sign up for the JSFCentral Newsletter:
http://oi.vresp.com/?fid=ac048d0e17
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com>wrote:
> Hello Volunteers,
>
> We were talking about Ajax on JSR-362 and I suggested they use OpenAjax
> over there like we do in JSF. I looked into it and here's what I found.
>
> >>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:00:17 -0800, Edward Burns <
> edward.burns_at_oracle.com> said:
>
> EB> Hello Volunteers,
> EB> As promised, here is the text from the JSF spec about usage of OpenAjax
> EB> in the jsf.js file.
>
> EB> 8<---------------
>
> EB> 13.2 JavaScript Namespacing
>
> EB> JavaScript objects that are not enclosed within a namespace are global,
> EB> which means they run the risk of interfering, overriding and/or
> EB> clobbering previously defined JavaScript objects. This section defines
> EB> the requirements for implementations intending to use the JavaServer
> EB> Faces 2.0 JavaScript API.
>
> EB> The Open Ajax Alliance is an organization of leading vendors, open
> EB> source projects, and companies using Ajax. Their prime objective is to
> EB> accelerate customer success with Ajax, through the use of open
> EB> standards. The Open Ajax Registry is an industry-wide Ajax registration
> EB> authority managed by the OpenAjax Alliance. The Registry maintains
> EB> industry- wide lists of Ajax runtime libraries to help prevent object
> EB> collisions.
>
> EB> There is a top level namespace jsf that is registered with the Open
> Ajax
> EB> Alliance:
>
> EB> Java Ajax: {
> EB> namespaceURI:"http://www.sun.com",
> EB> version:"1.0",
> EB> globals_to_approve:["jsf"],
> EB> comments: "Used in the JSF 2.0 specification.",
> EB> specificationURI:"http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=316",
> EB> email: "jsfaces_at_sun.com"
> EB> }
>
> EB> [P1-start openajax registration]If the OpenAjax library is available,
> EB> libraries must register themselves using OpenAjax.registerLibrary() at
> EB> the time when the JavaScript files are fetched and parsed by the
> EB> browser\u2019s JavaScript engine. [P1-end]
>
> EB> if (typeof OpenAjax != "undefined" &&
> EB> typeof OpenAjax.hub.registerLibrary != "undefined") {
> EB> OpenAjax.hub.registerLibrary("jsf", "www.sun.com", "1.0",
> EB> null); }
>
> EB> --
> EB> 8<---------------
>
> EB> Unfortunately, I now see this text on the website:
>
> EB> "The following organizations were Members of OpenAjax Alliance at the
> EB> time OpenAjax Alliance terminated formal operations:" A little
> research
> EB> revealed this email about the termination:
>
> EB> http://openajax.org/pipermail/steeringcommittee/2012q4/001015.html
>
> EB> And this article, now nearly four years old.
>
> EB>
> https://devcentral.f5.com/articles/5-years-later-openajax-who#.UqdusoG7liw
>
> EB> Basically, it seems OpenAjax is dead. Anyone care to comment on
> whether
> EB> we should bother with it in JSR-362?
>
> My question here in this group is: should we remove our mention and
> usage of OpenAjax in the JSF spec?
>
> Ed
>
> --
>