Re: Issue with new validation scheme in HEAD

From: David M. Lloyd <>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 10:47:36 -0500

On Thu, 17 May 2007 08:32:16 -0700
Ryan Lubke <Ryan.Lubke_at_Sun.COM> wrote (quoting Craig):

> [...]
> The spec language doesn't say anything, but the JSF 1.1 DTD comment
> regarding <managed-bean-name> includes the comment 'It must be of
> type "Identifier"', which references back to a "type description"
> above claiming that the content must conform to the syntax of a valid
> Java identifier. I suspect that, when this DTD was translated into a
> schema, this requirement was taken literally.
> That creates an interesting backwards compatibility problem for
> Shale, but also an interesting spec question regarding backwards
> compatibility ... the RI for 1.2 is enforcing a requirement that the
> RI for 1.1 did not enforce, which could be argued is a breakage.
> But, in the mean time, I'm going to look at what the impact would be
> of correcting these names in Shale.

> We haven't released these changes yet, so this has no immediate
> impact, but it would be good to get a discussion going on this and
> figure out what should be done.
> For those of you on the EG, what do you think? Should the 1.2 schema
> be relaxed?

Not personally on the EG, but relaxing the schema has my vote, 110%.
No downside that I can see, and that behavior is, well, kind of
obnoxious. :-)