Mailing-List: contact myfaces-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "MyFaces Development" <myfaces-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of sean.schofield@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.184.196 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=akPJ4Kp8Y2OsHV1iRgdMu5vDMnTrRXEiZ1LQigsZuTZy1HElySjipeCbpPmaG31IqoHtl8RqEfKLUdNG7wb7SZ29GnymPjMMbkkgHiHQAGGAD9S4w/8wjADmINQFCtpzFoQabIkSQ95LC55IQTyiqtUbIorboWdud8eQ9CBP4bg=
Message-ID: <2387fbc505041111064726773c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 14:06:26 -0400
From: Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com>
To: MyFaces Development <myfaces-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Proposed improvement to x:dataTable
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

We're trying to use x:dataTable in a project for work right now. 
There are a few limitations that I would like to address with the
group's approval.

The main problem we're having is that you cannot have an open-ended
list of columns in your data.  Specifically, in our application we
have a feature where user's can build their own SQL queries and
generate custom reports.  We display the reports in a table now but we
don' t have the sort or page functionality of x:dataTable.   We can't
use x:dataTable as is b/c we don't know how many columns there are in
advance (or what name to give the header.)

I'd like to add a few additional attributes to x:dataTable that would
allow you to specify value binding expressions for determining the
names of the column headers along with which facet to use for which
column type.  Everything would work as before so this is just extra
functionality.  If there aren't any objections I would like to add the
functionality and a simple example for people to look at.  If there
are problems with it (or improvements) then we can back out the
changes or make further changes.  I think the idea is easier to
explain with actual code.

Please let me know if you have a problem with this approach.

sean