Any prohibition on (non-HTML) namespaced tags would imply to me that arbitrary namespaced attributes would be a no-no in Dreamweaver as well. Stefano, as I haven't ever used Dreamweaver for more than ten minutes, is this limitation a rendering issue or data entry issue? I question the position though. Taking two obvious possibilites:There are more side effects with Velocity, FreeMarker and similar: as they generate text they also introduce problems with encoding manipulation.
1. Velocity syntax: just plugs in in the best-case scenario as text but suffers from the danger of having the text "#foreach" wrapped in a tag by the editor. Well-formedness is not guaranteed. (I think. Correct em if I'm wrong.)
I think we did not agree on standarized lookup syntax. On the contrary: some of us want to use Jexl-like syntax (when working with beans), some want to use XPath(working with pure xml).Expressions are the "${expr}" stuff in e.g. JXTG and should be use able both in text in attributes and element content. Do we need the "$"? Couldn't we just use "{expr}" as in XSLT?
I'm glad someone else said this. I totally agree. If I understand correctly, the reason behind the '$' character was to differentiate JXPath and JEXL expressions. Since the current thought is that we'll standardize the lookup syntax, why the extra character. It can be said that people are used to JXTG, but far more people are used to XSLT-style attribute value substitution.
It's sometimes problematic to use XPath on beans (I had problems with comparing values and issues with types). It's completely unnatural to use Jexl syntax on xml data.
We rather agreed that we need ELs to be pluggable.
-- Leszek Gawron [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project Manager MobileBox sp. z o.o. +48 (61) 855 06 67 http://www.mobilebox.pl mobile: +48 (501) 720 812 fax: +48 (61) 853 29 65
