You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Ed Burns <Ed...@Sun.COM> on 2009/11/03 16:24:52 UTC
Re: JSF 2.0 - Bean Validation, Unified EL and other specs
>>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:06:04 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> said:
MW> Hi Jan-Kees,
MW> thanks for creating this ticket. I'd like to see something like this.
MW> Sounds (to me) very useful...
Note that there is a precedent for doing this kind of discovery without
requiring a Java language signature: the way properties are conveyed to
the standard XML parsers in Java. I would rather avoid introducing a
signature for this because it needs to be very fluid over time.
Ed
--
| ed.burns@sun.com | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/
Re: JSF 2.0 - Bean Validation, Unified EL and other specs
Posted by Ed Burns <Ed...@Sun.COM>.
>>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:29:22 +0100, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> said:
MW> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Ed Burns <Ed...@sun.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:06:04 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> said:
>>
MW> Hi Jan-Kees,
MW> thanks for creating this ticket. I'd like to see something like this.
MW> Sounds (to me) very useful...
>>
>> Note that there is a precedent for doing this kind of discovery without
>> requiring a Java language signature: the way properties are conveyed to
>> the standard XML parsers in Java. I would rather avoid introducing a
>> signature for this because it needs to be very fluid over time.
MW> fair enough, so let's keep it to be part of the implementation.
MW> In myfaces we have several non public classes, big issue here
MW> (in this particular) case is that we actually have to duplicate the
MW> code. Oh well :-)
I'm not saying we can't have an API, I'm just saying that the API
doesn't have to be encoded using Java language signatures such as an
interface. This is a broader question of allowing the JSF runtime to
expose metadata, such as configuration and capabilities. There is lots
of prior art on how to do this without using Java language signatures.
Ed
--
| ed.burns@sun.com | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/
Re: JSF 2.0 - Bean Validation, Unified EL and other specs
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Ed Burns <Ed...@sun.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:06:04 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> said:
>
> MW> Hi Jan-Kees,
> MW> thanks for creating this ticket. I'd like to see something like this.
> MW> Sounds (to me) very useful...
>
> Note that there is a precedent for doing this kind of discovery without
> requiring a Java language signature: the way properties are conveyed to
> the standard XML parsers in Java. I would rather avoid introducing a
> signature for this because it needs to be very fluid over time.
fair enough, so let's keep it to be part of the implementation.
In myfaces we have several non public classes, big issue here
(in this particular) case is that we actually have to duplicate the
code. Oh well :-)
-M
>
> Ed
>
> --
> | ed.burns@sun.com | office: 408 884 9519 OR x31640
> | homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf