struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Musachy Barroso" <musa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: name inconsistency
Date Sat, 07 Jul 2007 17:13:01 GMT
I committed the changes on rv 554226, the end result is something like:

* New base class ContextBean which defines the var attribute (and "id" for
backward compatibility). Tags that put values in the stack inherit from it
* Move "id" attribute to UIBean so it is in all UI tags
* Remove "id" from tags that are neither UIBean nor ContextBean (like
Property for example)

If we don't find any problem with this we can start updating the examples to
use "var" instead of "id" (Some help needed here)

musachy

On 7/3/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, as there are no objections we'll go with "var", here is the jira
> ticket:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-2027
>
> musachy
>
> On 6/28/07, Martin Cooper <martinc@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/28/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > What would be the best way to get to an agreement on this? cast a
> > vote?
> >
> >
> > I tend to feel that we're a bit too vote-happy around here, so I'd
> > prefer to
> > see us reach consensus instead, if we can.
> >
> > So far, I haven't heard anyone voice objections to 'var', so I'd suggest
> > that unless we do hear objections within, say, a couple of days, we just
> > run
> > with that.
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> > musachy
> > >
> > > On 6/28/07, Martin Cooper <martinc@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 6/27/07, Joe Germuska < joe@germuska.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, I have been very absentee from Struts discussions, but I
> > took a
> > > > > minute to review this one...
> > > > >
> > > > > Acknowledging that consistency (between s:set, s:url, s:bean, etc)
> > is
> > > > good
> > > > > but that "id" has specific semantics for HTML markup, what about
> > using
> > > > > "var"
> > > > > for the tags which put a value into a scope, in sympathy with the
> > JSTL
> > > > > syntax?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That makes a lot of sense to me.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Martin Cooper
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > > > >
> > > > > On 6/27/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any other ideas/opinions on this?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > musachy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 6/16/07, Musachy Barroso < musachy@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We have to options:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. use "id" in "set", and keep the other tags as they are
> > (using
> > > > > "id"),
> > > > > > > with its side effects (jspx)
> > > > > > > 2. leave set as it is (using name), and deprecate "id"
on the
> > > other
> > > > > tags
> > > > > > > and use "name" instead ("bean" would be an special case)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > right? I'd say 2 would be better but it would take a lot
of
> > > > > deprecation
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > musachy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 6/16/07, Martin Cooper < martinc@apache.org >
wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 6/14/07, David Durham, Jr. < david.durham.jr@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 6/14/07, Musachy Barroso <musachy@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Also:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > action,
> > > > > > > > > > date
> > > > > > > > > > text
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Still a problem,  IMO, because if you're someone
that
> > writes
> > > > .jspx
> > > > > > > > > documents, you can only use a tag that uses id
+ value
> > stack
> > > key
> > > > > > > > > combination in, at most, one place within a document,
and
> > > still
> > > > > have
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > valid jspx.  Maybe this is a minor issue, though,
and
> > > shouldn't
> > > > > > > > > change.  Has anyone else even noticed it?  The
only reason
> > it
> > > > > > occurred
> > > > > > > > > to me is that there's the presence of styleId
on some
> > tags.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't think this is minor. As you point out, in
Struts 1
> > we
> > > were
> > > > > > very
> > > > > > > > careful about where we used 'id' because of the special
> > semantic
> > > > in
> > > > > > XML.
> > > > > > > > We
> > > > > > > > need to be equally careful in Struts 2, so that we
don't
> > > suddenly
> > > > > > > > invalidate
> > > > > > > > whole classes of use cases (such as JSPX).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Martin Cooper
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Dave
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Joe Germuska
> > > > > Joe@Germuska.com * http://blog.germuska.com
> > > > >
> > > > > "I felt so good I told the leader how to follow."
> > > > > -- Sly Stone
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd
>



-- 
"Hey you! Would you help me to carry the stone?" Pink Floyd

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message