Jay, I should have been more clear. You were correct in asking for and further providing more clarity to the statement. I agree whole heartedly with your statement. <u>
It is a mistake to tie this little tag to struts, tapestry or any other framework. </u> The only dependency I agree with to date is the usage of commons-beanutils.jar. While we are on the topic of "dos and don'ts", I would also like to state another flaw in the tag library. The use of decorators is not consistent with the reason a user would want to use our tag. The user is trying to avoid custom coding display logic. If we wanted to provide the user with a consistent model, it should be a nestable tag interface that would be looked for in the body of a column tag. Coding a decorator for every little thing is tedious. There should be generic tags that could be nested within the larger context of table or column. One final note as I have had enough coffee this morning, If you are proud of your statement, it should not be diminished with a signature line like that is just my 2 cents worth. I liked what you had to say. I would have enjoyed the statement more if you would have said something like "eat these words" or "fix your misuse of indefinite articles when doing spell check and I won't have to do it for you next time..." Thanks for your input Jay, keep it coming :) Ben ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paulsen, Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "displayTag" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:02 AM Subject: RE: [displaytag-devel] Whither Future Development after 0.8.5? > > > > > > This might correct that the way we are progressing with "one > > off" bug fixes > > and a tendency towards struts as an assumed underlying framework > > > > Is display tag development heading in the direction of coupling it with > struts? > I think it would be a mistake to tie the display tag to struts (or any > underlying > framework for that matter). If this is not what you meant, I apologize. > > Just my 2 cents worth, > -Jay > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Benjamin Simpson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 8:14 AM > > To: displayTag > > Subject: Re: [displaytag-devel] Whither Future Development > > after 0.8.5? > > > > > > Well put John. I am +1 for this approach. What permissions > > in SourceForge > > are necessary to make the modules appear ("directed to any > > seasoned Source > > Forge Admin")? If I have sufficient permissions and group > > consent, I will > > go ahead and make modules for John, Myself and any others who want to > > participate. > > > > I further propose that if you are willing to put your refactorings out > > there, they should only be considered if sufficient documentation and > > examples accompany them. A readme, buildme, seeme and whyme > > set of files? > > Get me? > > > > This might correct that the way we are progressing with "one > > off" bug fixes > > and a tendency towards struts as an assumed underlying framework > > > > Ben > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There! > NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today! > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en > _______________________________________________ > displaytag-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/displaytag-devel > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There! NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en _______________________________________________ displaytag-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/displaytag-devel
