Sorry let me snip it a bit
>>>
>>> More correct perhaps would be to speak about adding "action oriented"
>>> web framework capabilities or "MVC push" in contrast to the "MVC pull"
>>> pattern that's currently implemented by JSF and thus in Java EE.
>>>
>>> To sum up I propose to take the following into account:
>>>
>>> 1. Just "MVC" is too broad
>>> 2. Use "MVC push"/"action oriented" for what Spring MVC does
>>> 3. Use "MVC pull" for what JSF does
>>>
>>> Would that make things more clear?
>
As a side note - this helps, thanks - I did not know that 'MVC pull'
concept even existed which is something I'm Ok with admitting - and I've
no doubt I'll get to understand how it works in scope of possible JSF
related discussions.
But to summarize what I've said so far is that, and I'm repeating it
here, I'm Ok with JSF experts contributing to the effort but IMHO it is
absolutely critical that the solution ends up being portable (to be used
with multiple MVC frameworks) which would imply IMHO that JAX-RS will
end up specifying something very light, may be based on what Jerser
already provides.
Cheers, Sergey
>
>>
>> AFAIK we have not started a technical discussion yet and as such I'm not
>> sure why are we talking about these technical distinctions here
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Arjan
>>
>