struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <craig...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Modular Struts Examples
Date Thu, 03 Jul 2003 20:25:57 GMT


On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Vic Cekvenich wrote:

> Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 15:27:58 -0400
> From: Vic Cekvenich <vic_cekvenich@baseBeans.com>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> To: struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Modular Struts Examples
>
> snip
> >>
> >>Target servlet 2.3 snip - There are now dependencies on 2.3 and
> >>more comming. Almost no one uses Tomcat 3. TC 5 level JSP 2.0 looks like
> >>
> >>more fun. People that want 2.2 or 1.3 could rebuild, or they can keep
> >>using solid 1.1. A small KISS step. By the time 1.2 comes out....
> >>
> snip
>
> >
> >
> > How many times do we need to explain this to you?  Struts 1.x is based on
> > Servlet 2.2 and JSP 1.1.  It would take a major release version upgrade to
> > change that dependency.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >>.V
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Craig
> >>
> >>
>
>
> Would David's argument be that JSF integration (requires 2.3) be
> postponed till Struts 2.0?

For integration into the core of Struts, yes it does.  But we can provide
an optional add-on integration for Faces, just like struts-el does for EL
evaluation, as soon as Faces 1.0 goes final.  Use it if you want, but it's
not required by the core of Struts.

> OK, just do one or the other, so everyone is playing on the level field.
>
> And a great argument on Maverick vs Ant David.
> Good thing I did not do the diff for all of this.
>
> Here is "Struts" with JSP2.0:
>
> <table  border="0">
> <tr>
>   <td class="text_high" width="800">
>    <li> ${fb['title']}
>   </td>
> </tr>
> <tr>
>   <td class="text">
>   <br>
>    ${fb['content']}
>   </td>
> </tr>
> </table>
>
> The most importnat part is that the C tag, DOES NOT NEED TO BE DECLARED
> in the JSP 2.0, since C tag, and EL is part of the JSP 2.0 Spec. Nice.

Well, if you actually use <c:out> you still have to declare the tag
library :-).  But your point is well taken, that you don't even need to
use <c:out> in most cases.

>
>
> .V

Craig

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: struts-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: struts-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message