Hi all,
The implementation is pretty much already done in Mojarra, but we have
not required BCP 47 support as it required JavaSE 7. Now that JSF 2.3 is
requiring JavaSE 8 we could easily state it is a requirement.
Howerver we do have specification adjustments that need to be done in
how <supported-locales> and <default-locale> in faces-config.xml need to
be parsed (as that is in the specification).
As I said I don't feel strong either way.
So far we have one EG member saying +1.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Manfred Riem
On 8/25/15, 10:14 PM, Josh Juneau wrote:
> No preference on this, but how difficult is the implementation? If
> this is going to help make the Locale support in JSF more current,
> then perhaps it is worth the fix.
>
> Josh Juneau
> juneau001_at_gmail.com <mailto:juneau001_at_gmail.com>
> http://jj-blogger.blogspot.com
> https://www.apress.com/index.php/author/author/view/id/1866
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:07 AM, manfred riem <manfred.riem_at_oracle.com
> <mailto:manfred.riem_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> While I do not have a preference if we do not get a response we'll
> go with option #1.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Kind regards,
> Manfred Riem
>
> On 8/24/15, 11:39 AM, manfred riem wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Looking at this issue I think we have 2 options:
>
> 1. Do nothing and let the JSF runtime do what is has done in
> the past (status quo).
> 2. Make it so that when dealing with Locales the
> Locale.forLanguageTag() is consulted first,
> and only if it fails let the old code do its work.
>
> I have no particular preference, so please voice your support
> for either.
>
> Note I like to close the loop on this before 8/31.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Kind regards,
> Manfred Riem
>
>
>