Jesse's idea is interesting, but it does add a new level of ambiguity. I guess you could just try each binding factory in series and take the result that doesn't throw an exception. You could extend BindingFactory to "sniff" expressions for suitability (using regexp, etc.).
However, there's a number of obvious, ambiguous cases where you would still need a prefix, or soemthing, to disambiguate. I.e., class="important" .... is "important" a literal, a message key, or the name of a property? What if there's a message key and a property, which do you use? This idea could be explored in a branch, but I'd rather not see it in the trunk. In the meantime, there's dozens of things that are unambiguosly essential for Tapestry 5 that will make an even bigger difference (such as a built-in BeanForm/BeanEditor component). On 1/18/07, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
None taken, conversations would be boring if everyone always agreed. ;) wrt: "Ok, how is it going to interpret what I write again?" That's the whole point, you shouldn't need to worry about how it interprets it. It should really Just Work (tm). How many situations are there ~really~ where it wouldn't be pretty damn easy for the framework to figure it out on its own? There's no reason at all why we can't and shouldn't do it. But, ultimately the decision rests with Howard as he has the most work invested in it. We'll just have to wait and see if he likes it or not, and if he does - how long he'll be able to let the thought pester and bother him. ;) On 1/18/07, Nick Westgate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No offence Jessie, I wasn't disregarding your suggestion - just > trying to stimulate some more responses to Howard's question. > > But as to the effects of your suggestion, my gut reaction when > thinking about writing an attribute would be _another_ level of > "Ok, how is it going to interpret what I write again?" > > Still waiting for others to chime in ... > > Cheers, > Nick. > > > Jesse Kuhnert wrote: > > I guess....Though it seems hardly like the stuff of dreams. Everything > > else in T5 is so perfect, I'd hate to see this become an eyesore > > somehow. (not that it ever was, but it has had it's quirks here and > > there ..) > > > > I wasn't asking for Howard to implement it a particular way though, > > I'm perfectly happy with what he has right now. My intention was to > > fish for his thoughts on it and volunteer myself to implement them. > > > > T5 does need to come out at some point, I just thought the idea rang > > true in my head and wanted to share it. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Jesse Kuhnert Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship TWD Consulting, Inc. Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry Creator, Apache HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
