JSRs: Java Specification Requests
JSR 314: JavaServer Faces 2.0
JCP version in use: 2.7
Java Specification Participation Agreement version in use: 2.0
This JSR is an update to the 1.2 version of the JavaServer Faces specification. This is the first major revision of the JavaServer Faces specification since JSR 127.
Please direct comments on this JSR to the Spec Lead(s)
If you would like to be added to the observer alias for this JSR and receive e-mail updates on the progress of the JSR, please send e-mail to the Spec Lead with "Add to observer alias" in the subject line.
Original Java Specification Request (JSR)
Section 1. Identification
Submitting Member: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Name of Contact Person: Ed Burns
E-Mail Address: ed.burns
Telephone Number: +1 408 884 9519
Fax Number: +1 407 294 2468
Specification Lead: Ed Burns & Roger Kitain
E-Mail Address: ed.burns
Telephone Number: +1 408 884 9519 & +1 781 442 6237
Fax Number: + 1 407 294 2468
Initial Expert Group Membership:
Supporting this JSR:
Section 2: Request
2.1 Please describe the proposed Specification:
This JSR will bring the best ideas in web application development (circa early 2007) to the Java EE platform. The Expert Group will be harvesting existing ideas that:
Ease of Development
While this was the major theme for Java EE 5, it was not the major theme for the version of the JavaServer Faces specification included therein. The act of writing JSF applications and components "by hand" will be made much easier by this JSR. Example requirements in this category include:
Requirements in this category stem from feedback from real world JSF users and are incremental improvements on the existing specification. This category includes fixes and updates to existing APIs. Example requirements in this category include:
The flexibility of the JavaServer framework can lead to performance concerns. Requirements in this category make modifications and restrictions to the specification to increase performance across the board for all implementations of the specification. Example requirements in this category include:
Increasing the capability of the JavaServer Faces standard will continue to attract more people to write applications targeting the standard, thereby raising the bar for Java web applications. Features in this category aim to attract new developers to use products that implement the JavaServer Faces specification. Example requirements in this category include:
2.2 What is the target Java platform? (i.e., desktop, server, personal, embedded, card, etc.)
2.3 The Executive Committees would like to ensure JSR submitters think about how their proposed technology relates to all of the Java platform editions. Please provide details here for which platform editions are being targeted by this JSR, and how this JSR has considered the relationship with the other platform editions.
This specification targets the Java EE 6 Platform. It will be based on the corresponding release of the Java SE platform.
2.4 Should this JSR be voted on by both Executive Committees?
No. Just the SE/EE Executive Committee.
2.5 What need of the Java community will be addressed by the proposed specification?
While JavaServer Faces has succeeded in becoming the standard way to build web application user interfaces while ensuring maximum container portability and minimizing vendor lock-in, the state of the art of web application user interface development has advanced significantly since the first major draft of the specification. The Java community finds itself in a similar situation to that in which the first version of the JavaServer Faces specification was initiated: Many great ideas but no standard specification that delivers them to developers and the marketplace. In fact, many of these great ideas are built on top of the JavaServer Faces Specification but, are not, themselves, standards. It is time to harvest these ideas and bring them to a wider audience in manner consistent with the rest of the Java Platform.
2.6 Why isn't this need met by existing specifications?
The problem domain of web application user interface and lifecycle development is not covered by any other JSR. This problem domain is squarely the purview of JavaServer Faces.
2.7 Please give a short description of the underlying technology or technologies:
See 2.1 above.
2.8 Is there a proposed package name for the API Specification? (i.e., javapi.something, org.something, etc.)
2.9 Does the proposed specification have any dependencies on specific operating systems, CPUs, or I/O devices that you know of?
2.10 Are there any security issues that cannot be addressed by the current security model?
The Java SE security model is perfectly sufficient for the needs of this specifiation. There will be security related features in the specification, but these will build on top of the current security model.
2.11 Are there any internationalization or localization issues?
Faces technology deals with internationalization and localization. This version of the specification will expand this support to the realm of Ajax based applications.
2.12 Are there any existing specifications that might be rendered obsolete, deprecated, or in need of revision as a result of this work?
Yes. The specifications for the following technologies will certainly be impacted by this specification:
2.13 Please describe the anticipated schedule for the development of this specification.
2.14 Please describe the anticipated working model for the Expert Group working on developing this specification.
We will use the same working model as in JSR-252: primarily email discussion with occasional conference calls and other distributed team technology uses. See section 2.15 for the transparency measures we will use.
The reference implementation will be developed using an Open Source development model.
2.15 It is important to the success of the community and each JSR that the work of the Expert Group be handled in a manner which provides the community and the public with insight into the work the Expert Group is doing, and the decisions that the Expert Group has made. The Executive Committees would like to ensure Spec Leads understand the value of this transparency and ask that each JSR have an operating plan in place for how their JSR will address the involvement of the community and the public. Please provide your plan here, and refer to the Spec Lead Guide for a more detailed description and a set of example questions you may wish to answer in your plan.
We will leverage the collaborative tools provided by the java.net infrastructure. We have established the "javaserverfaces-spec-public" project on java.net. Therein, we will have a public issue tracker for tracking most issues. Any issues that absolutely must be EG private will be handled with a separate EG-private issue tracker. We will have an EG-private mailing list, and we will have a monitored public discussion forum as well. The reference implementation will be developed entirely in the public javaserverfaces project on java.net. The TCK will be developed privately by Sun. We will leverage the Early Draft feature of JCP 2.6 to allow the public to see the spec in progress.
2.16 Please describe how the RI and TCK will de delivered, i.e. as part of a profile or platform edition, or stand-alone, or both. Include version information for the profile or platform in your answer.
Sun will deliver a Reference Implementation (RI) and Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK). The RI will be made available standalone and as part of the Java EE 6 platform. The TCK will be made available standalone and as part of the Java EE 6 CTS.
2.17 Please state the rationale if previous versions are available stand-alone and you are now proposing in 2.13 to only deliver RI and TCK as part of a profile or platform edition (See sections 1.1.5 and 1.1.6 of the JCP 2 document).
2.18 Please provide a description of the business terms for the Specification, RI and TCK that will apply when this JSR is final.
Pursuant to Section 2.2.1 of the Java Community Process version 2.6, the following is a summary of Sun's anticipated principal license terms and conditions for the JSR, JavaServer Faces (JSF) 2.0. The business terms for JSF 2.0 have not changed from those for JSF 1.2 and they impose no new restrictions.
The JSF 2.0 Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK) will be available both as a standalone TCK and included as part of the Java EE 6 Compatibility Test Suite (CTS). The JSF 2.0 Reference Implementation (RI) will be available both separately and as part of the Java EE 6 RI.
As required by the Java Specification Participation Agreement (JSPA), the JSF 2.0 TCK will be licensed at no charge without support to qualified not-for-profit entities. Such qualification will be verified by the Compatibility Testing Scholarship Program. Support may also be provided at no charge with approval of the scholarship board. For more information, please refer to: http://java.sun.com/scholarship/.
The RI will be available at no cost under an open source license.
Covers all use that doesn't fall under "Non-Commercial Use" above.
JSF 2.0 TCK Java Licensee Engineering (JLE) support, available for a fee not to exceed $50k, is required for commercial use for each Marketed Product which implements the JSF 2.0 specification. TCK JLE support includes access, updates and upgrades to the TCK at no additional charge.
JSF 2.0 RI and TCK JLE and marketing support will be made available at no extra charge to Java EE licensees under their existing terms.
The RI will also be made available at no cost under an open source license for commercial use.
For purposes of these terms:
Marketed Product is intended to describe a licensee's product that has its own differentiation and marketing collateral. It may comprise one price list entry, or in some cases multiple entries (for example, to account for different localizations or delivery packaging). By way of example, in terms of Sun's product line we wouldn't consider Sun's Java Application Server to be a Marketed Product, but Sun's Java Application Server Platform Edition, Standard Edition, and Enterprise Edition are 3 Marketed Products. Sun's Java Studio Enterprise is a fourth Marketed Product.
Section 3: Contributions
3.1 Please list any existing documents, specifications, or implementations that describe the technology. Please include links to the documents if they are publicly available.
Some of the ideas to be harvested in this release of the specification are described in the links in the following list:
3.2 Explanation of how these items might be used as a starting point for the work.
Shale Remoting provides a basis for deliving static content from the CLASSPATH of the application. This is a starting point for the "bundling associated resources" feature. Shale Dialog Manager, along with Spring Web Flow, Seam, and the JSF-Extensions flash, may serve as the starting point for the "passing values from page to page" feature. Shale View Controller will inform the features relating to the request processing lifecycle. Shale Tiger Extensions will inform the discussions related to features that use Java Language annotations to increase ease of development.
Project Dynamic Faces
Along with Ajax4JSF, Project Dynamic Faces will serve as a starting point for features relating to extending the JSF lifecycle to leverage Ajax. Dynamic Faces also has some ideas relating to elimination of the deplopment step.
Along with Project Dynamic Faces, Ajax4JSF will inform the Ajax related discussions. Ajax4JSF also has a declarative rendering feature that will serve as a starting point for that feature in the JavaServer Faces specification.
Tapestry 5 leverages annotations and contains ideas about eliminating the deployment step. It also addresses performance.
ADF Faces has a partial page refresh feature that will inform the request processing lifecycle features. It also has robust and mature skinning support for changing the style and appearance of user interface components.
Facelets has quickly become an enormously popular view description language for Java Server Faces. This JSR aims to standardize most of what is in Facelets, including its page templating feature.
Project jMaki will serve as a starting point for how to allow the developer to move as much of their UI logic into the client as desired.
Project Phobos will serve as a starting point for how to support scripting on the server side.
Spring Web Flow
Spring Web Flow, will inform discussions relating to the request processing lifecycle, and the "passing values between pages" features.