Hi Jim,
Yes, I think so b/c I don't think you can map f:view in the
faces-config.xml file (f: tags aren't components). h:body would be
mappable, or replacable by other component sets which provide equivalent
functionality.
Ken
Jim Driscoll wrote:
> Yes, that would solve the singlton problem, but would h:body be more
> extensible than f:view?
>
> jim
>
> Ken Paulsen wrote:
>>
>> If it's not a separate component, then I think I'd prefer it to be on
>> a "body" tag, which I think is planned for v2.0.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> Jim Driscoll wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Ken Paulsen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think I'd prefer it not be an f:view attribute in 2.0. If a
>>>> component library decides to override or extend this functionality,
>>>> I'm not sure they can do that with f:view. But that's just my
>>>> preference. ;)
>>>>
>>>> Ken
>>>
>>> That's a good point. The idea behind putting it there was that
>>> there's only one focus per view, and that's a way of enforcing
>>> that. Do you have any idea of how you'd like it to be instead?
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>