Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 5992 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2007 15:34:38 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Sep 2007 15:34:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 94920 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2007 15:34:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 94643 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2007 15:34:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@myfaces.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "MyFaces Development" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 94632 invoked by uid 99); 7 Sep 2007 15:34:30 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:34:30 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of andrew.rw.robinson@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.189 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.128.189] (HELO fk-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.128.189) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 15:34:27 +0000 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so575527fks for ; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:34:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=+6+4C71A5wo0eAy+zVV+JaAM9r1GUIrDhtDW3Ho2z5M=; b=kxIH1IEUSYz6kZOiILSsIo5WMpB1K9Q31XsYpVejiH6Ja3umWGV4cL2SbyjYUhQdnFPxeqnkJ1hJ+jkjBI4klAzWsFnXG9ZXU0u1Hus6LYnv6qcTHjlz7JqzR//8F23BKLdsezyqRN5hRRudJ33zL36XBkBCIqdQZZ4yOv9hQUI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=RQ/YsRVhNx4ody2KzpUsCNAKljpCztXJhgfuFhYk3sxe7RkbvMys/W3SE6NABxrwlLnUqb1FfUlcXE4r8rzmWKUL1C6lpq/zHs1qutO/fSNtSwww7NMkOdCIW3yUTQlizgHdeomI3A0cN6fZywM/9Q6nfX+SKHAtEt0EgKnqmE4= Received: by 10.82.183.19 with SMTP id g19mr2678675buf.1189179245599; Fri, 07 Sep 2007 08:34:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.159.18 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Sep 2007 08:34:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 09:34:05 -0600 From: "Andrew Robinson" To: "MyFaces Development" Subject: Re: [Trinidad] Components provided by issues 663 and 664 - overview and chance to vote In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <6dac79b90709040900w59916a9bwdb2d03ebc2ee5cb4@mail.gmail.com> <6dac79b90709051345t784fa489pd33481b53007305d@mail.gmail.com> <6dac79b90709061645w6efcd938t4420b8620b3a2647@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Adam, To put it a little more politically correct, I think it is very important to have the PPR/AJAX function of Trinidad viewed as completely separate functionality from the Trinidad components. In the same way that decisions by RichFaces developers does not limit Ajax4JSF functionality, I don't feel that Trinidad components should limit Trinidad PPR functionality. If a user must choose RichFaces+A4J, ICEFaces or Trinidad to get PPR functionality since the libraries really are not compatible, I think it is extremely important to ensure that the AJAX functionality that Trinidad uses should be as portable and feature rich as possible to allow users to integrate more than one library at a time (facelets and seam are examples of very popular frameworks that have components). I think this is also a very good reason why I proposed, and at the time you agreed, that the PPR/AJAX functionality should be extracted from Trinidad and made part of a MyFaces AJAX commons library. With this in mind, I think the PPR functionality in Trinidad should be designed for all JSF development scenarios, and not just ones that only apply to Trinidad components. So when you said that it wasn't important that seam:validation, seam:validateAll and seam:decorate functionality should not be supported by Trinidad PPR, because Trinidad components would not benefit from that functionality just because most users that use Trinidad components, use client-side validation, it is almost like you are saying that users have to choose either 100% Trinidad components, or not to use Trinidad at all as the message that is coming across is that the Trinidad developers will not support functionality that doesn't apply to most of the Trinidad component use cases. The tr:partialTrigger component's functionality is primarily for usage with server-side validation, not JavaScript validation. It is very important to have this functionality for users that will be using 3rd party validators, and 3rd party components, as witnessed by the Seam components I just listed. Also, I have mentioned several times a use case of requiring server side validation for validation of database uniqueness of fields (like user name), but you have never responded to that, but instead keep going back to client-side validation. How do you propose to handle database-based JSF validators with PPR? In summary, my point is that I believe tr:partialTrigger provides required functionality for a complete AJAX library. I also would like this project to invest some time and research into providing more robust AJAX support that is similar in nature to some of the A4J functionality (like the A4J support component's attributes in particular). If we could get to more of a model of: MyFaces AJAX - used by: - Trinidad components - Oracle rich client - Tomahawk - Sandbox - Tobago? I think that a MyFaces custom component solution will become a lot more appealing to people wishing to build a new JSF project. There has been a lot of evidence that users do not feel that the PPR in Trinidad is on the same playing field as A4J. Adding the missing functionality, and making Trinidad's PPR functionality usable by all component frameworks that wish to use it would go a very long way to making Trinidad more ubiquitous.