I like the passthrough approach, but we should really provide a tag too.
There are still plenty of people who don't use the pure HTML syntax
(especially since it's not supported by third-party component libraries).
___
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://
<
http://blogs.jsfcentral.com/JSFNewscast/>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, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com>
wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:55:21 +0300, Cagatay Civici <
> cagatay.civici_at_gmail.com> said:
>
> CC> I like this approach as well, better than what we have discussed so
> far.
> CC> +1,
>
> CC> So Bauke, do you propose we dont do anything since it can be already
> CC> solved with current APIs?
>
> I've asked the original poster, Ryan de Laplante, if he's satisfied with
> this approach.
>
> Either way, it's a pretty compelling endorsement of pass through
> elements and attributes.
>
> Ed
>
> --
> | edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
> | 28 Business days til JavaOne 2015
> | 43 Business days til DOAG 2015
>