>>>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 13:47:21 -0700, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com> said:
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 13:30:40 -0700, Edward Burns <edward.burns_at_oracle.com> said:
EB> A resource path from Jakob's impl looks like
EB> "/javax.faces.resource/1.0.0/en_US/css/style.css". Does that 1.0.0
EB> refer to library version or resource version?
EB> It appears to refer to a "url-version". Jakob, can you please explain
EB> what that is?
One more question for the day on this. It seems like your
RelativeResourceHandler doesn't support versioned resources or versioned
libraries, is that correct? Because we *do* support this in JSF 2.0, I
don't think we can simply fail to support it in 2.2. It seems we have
another simplifying assumption to add to the system. Let's review the
current list of simplifying assumptions.
* RelativeResourceHandler only works with prefix mapped applications.
This is probably not an issue if we specify that javax.faces.resource
is prefixed mapped to go straight to
ResourceHandler.handleResourceRequest(). With this proviso, the app
can use prefix mapping for JSF pages, but resource requests will
always be rendered such that they go to the prefix mapped
javax.faces.resource.
* If you want relative resource loading to work, you must not have
versioned resources or versioned libraries.
Is this really true?
Ed
--
| edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/