.xhtml files give download popup

[kukeltje]

Haven't tried the webapp from cvs for more than a week and wanted to give it a try, also to see if the form caching is fixed.

Currently the .xhtml files give me a download popup with all jsf tags in there. Nothing of the webapp works. I

I run on jboss 4.0.4GA with jdk 1.4, have the latest dependencies. I do not see any errors in the logging and cannot turn on log4j since facelets and sun jsf use jdk logging. I'll try configuring that to see what causes this. If anybody has an idea, please let me know

[kukeltje]

Shoot, that should say jdk 1.5 on this specific system, no idea why the jdk got updated today. hmmm.... now I think of it, the jems installer wanted to download jre1.5.0_08....

but then again. I tested it while posting this and jdk1.4.2_08 has the same behaviour

[kukeltje]

when I add

<view-handler>com.sun.facelets.FaceletViewHandler</view-handler>

back into the faces-config.xml the webapp works again. This line is requried according to the facelets docs. It disappeared between 1.5 and 1.6. Although I cannot imagine this is the real cause.

[tom.baeyens]

start from the http://localhost:8080/jbpm-console

then it should work. i believe that the webapp is based on *.jsf url mappings, not on the xhtml forms themselves.

david should be able to correct me if i'm wrong

[kukeltje]

Nope it does not... the index page redirects me to a usertasklist which does nothing. And yes i've seen it is based on jsf mappings, so I should not use the xhtml, I know.

What I forgot to mention was that it was not so much that the .xhtml files do not work, but that you can download the contents.... I know we are open source, but shouldn't that be hidden some way or another? Especially if people start customizing the forms.

I'll try again, but I get a funny feeling (based on little experience, so do not flame me ;-)) that there is a mix of facelets and plain jsf

[kukeltje]

Shoot me....

I've been struggeling with this the whole afternoon and now I was about to give up, it 'works'. Still, I have this funny feeling. Am I correct that we on purpose not use the facelets viewhandler, but do use facelets? Is there a specific reason for this and doesn't limit certain facelets functionality? What I mean is what is the advantage over the version about a month ago where .xhtml files were addressed? I'm confused and others might be as well.

Btw, I'm impressed by all the work that went into the webapp and the progress that has been made, so no negative word about that.

[dmlloyd]

"kukeltje" wrote:
Shoot me....

I've been struggeling with this the whole afternoon and now I was about to give up, it 'works'. Still, I have this funny feeling. Am I correct that we on purpose not use the facelets viewhandler, but do use facelets? Is there a specific reason for this and doesn't limit certain facelets functionality?

Yes, this is on purpose. We use a chained view handler. First in the chain is JbpmViewHandler, then the ajax4jsf view handler, and finally the standard Facelets view handler. The chaining is performed automatically by ajax4jsf. There is a context parameter that defines the chaining order.

"kukeltje" wrote:
What I mean is what is the advantage over the version about a month ago where .xhtml files were addressed? I'm confused and others might be as well.

Basically, I need to put in a security constraint so that getting an .xhtml file results in an error. All the xhtml pages are served via facelets as .jsf action URLs.

"kukeltje" wrote:
Btw, I'm impressed by all the work that went into the webapp and the progress that has been made, so no negative word about that.

Thanks. :-)