Skip navigation

I discovered that Vanguard is using JSF via Backbase

When signing up for paperless statements on my 401(k), I stumbled upon another JSF user: The Vanguard Group. I see that they're using JSF via Backbase on their paperless signup page at: <https://personal.vanguard.com/us/JSP/RegLogOn/Regis/RegActivityContent.jsf>. I've added them to the RealWorldJSFLinks wiki at <http://wiki.java.net/bin/view/Projects/RealWorldJSFLinks>.

Anyone know what implementation of JSF they're using?

Technorati Tags: edburns

At JSFOne, someone suggested modifying the navigation rule system such that if the to-view-id is absent from a navigation-case, the to-view-id value be inferred from the outcome.

This would mean the following is valid:

<navigation-rule> 
    <from-view-id>/pages/inputname.jsp</from-view-id> 
    <navigation-case> 
      <from-outcome>sayHello</from-outcome> 
    </navigation-case> 
    <navigation-case> 
      <from-outcome>sayGoodbye</from-outcome> 
    </navigation-case> 
</navigation-rule>  

If the outcome is sayHello, the to-view-id is sayHello.xhtml.

If the outcome is sayGoodbye, the to-view-id is sayGoodbye.xhtml.

Naturally, I think if we do this we can dispense with the navigation-rules alltogether and say that if there is no navigation-rule for the page you're on, then just infer the to-view-id by takeing the outcome, tacking .xhtml onto it, and going there.

Is this a good idea?

If you're reading this blog and you're the person who gave me this idea, thanks and please follow up so we know who to blame thank.

Technorati Tags: edburns

The JSF Expert Group has just released another draft of the JSF 2.0 specification, Early Draft Review 2. There are many new features in this draft, including early implementations of composite components and Ajax. Please read the preface of the spec prose document to see the list changes.

This draft of the specification is fully implemented (though the TCK is not yet finished) and can be downloaded at the Mojarra nightly build area.

Also, I'm planning to have a free live webinar in mid-October where I'll go through the features in the new draft so you can be sure you've been exposed to all the new changes since JSF 1.2. I'll post the detials on this blog when I have a date.

Technorati Tags: edburns

I received a tip from Matthias We?endorf that Apple is using JSF for its online rebate site, which you can see at <https://rebate.apple.com/art-web/pages/newAccountCreationPage.faces>. A quick View Source shows the presence of our javax.faces.ViewState hidden field.  Inspection of the value of that field leads me to believe they are using Mojarra, but I am not certain.  If someone can confirm this, I’d be glad.  I've added them to the RealWorldJSFLinks Wiki.  Please feel free to add any other sites that you know are usin JSF.

Technorati Tags: edburns

Our current schedule for JSF 2.0 has us handing off the spec artifacts to the JCP on 15 December 2008. That’s 62 business days from today. We have 37 open spec issues, not including some ones floating around on the EG list that I need to put into the issue tracker. Of those 37, there are 20 that I’ve classified as “hard”, with help from FOJSF Yara Senger. If you care to help, please look at those hard issues and use the java.net “vote for this issue” feature to help us choose which of those hard ones to do first.

You may need to have “Observer”status to vote. If you do, leave a comment on the blog and I’ll add you.

Technorati Tags: edburns

One of the worst things about Java is the lack of a language level solution to the fragile base class problem. In the absence of a solution, the JSF EG has resorted to creating subclasses of interfaces, appending a digit to the interface name, and adding the methods there. For example, we created ActionSource2 as an extension ofActionSource just so we could support for the Unified EL in JSF 1.2.

The fragile base class problem is one we commonly face when evolving an API and JSF is no exception. JSF Spec Issue 327, filed by Trinidatd stalwart Matthias We?endorf, requests the addition of resetValuedirectly to EditableValueHolder, which would clearly break existing implementations of this interface. At JSFOne 2008 last week I spoke with Herr We?endorf and he asserted that most of the implementations of this interface will have aresetValue method, ore one very similar to it, in general. Therefore the pain of adding it toEditableValueHolder directly outweighs the nonsense of creating EditableValueHolder2 just for adding this method. It's a compelling argument, but I want to poll the community before doing it.

Please comment if you have an opinion about this minutia of JSF 2.0 design.

Technorati Tags: edburns

Filter Blog

By date: