Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-struts-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 72458 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2002 16:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Oct 2002 16:04:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 28159 invoked by uid 97); 15 Oct 2002 16:04:39 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 28111 invoked by uid 97); 15 Oct 2002 16:04:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Struts Developers List" Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 27857 invoked by uid 98); 15 Oct 2002 16:04:29 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) X-Sent: 15 Oct 2002 16:03:27 GMT Message-ID: <3DAC3C58.5020806@ehatchersolutions.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:03:36 -0400 From: Erik Hatcher User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Struts Developers List Subject: Re: LabelTag References: <7382FCA44E27D411BD4A00508BD68F95053CD410@pigeon.tumbleweed.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I would argue (mildly) that the design is a bit wrong if the base class attributes are hidden from subclass tags (although I just did something similar, didn't I? :), but either way its not a big deal since Struts already has a system in place to generate docs and TLD's, although its separate from the source. I think the source is the right place for docs and metadata for taglibs, hence my affection for XDoclet in this case :) Erik Martin Cooper wrote: > Unfortunately, it's not that simple with the Struts tags. Many of the tags > extend a base class which defines a number of common attributes. However, > just because the code for an attribute is available does *not* mean that it > should be exposed for every tag that extends the base class. > > A case in point is the HTML taglib. Which attributes are exposed for a > particular tag is dependent upon the HTML 4.01 spec. In the implementation, > it is very convenient to have several base classes which cover the large > majority of attributes. However, there are some tags which extend the base > classes, but which do not expose all of the attributes, so that they conform > to the spec. > > Now, if we could get XDoclet to handle that... ;-) > > -- > Martin Cooper > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Edgar Dollin [mailto:edgar@blue-moose.net] >>Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 7:22 AM >>To: 'Struts Developers List' >>Subject: RE: LabelTag >> >> >>The number of missing attributes in the tag libraries is >>large enough to >>consider >>a change, especially since writing tag libraries is one of the most >>pleasurable >>parts of what we do ;-). >> >>Edgar. >> >> >>>I do highly encourage the Struts committers to use XDoclet >> >>for TLD and >> >>>documentation generation (but I guess if it ain't broke, >> >>don't fix it, >>eh?). >> >>> Erik >> >> >> >> >>-- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> >>For additional commands, e-mail: >> >> >>-- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> >>For additional commands, e-mail: >> >> >> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: