At 03:38 PM 4/27/99 -0700, you wrote:
>vis a vis the discussion regarding the '.' vs. the ':', why even
>call these things "includeif"??
>
>I vote for a more programmatic syntax, like, say, "if/else" ala
>most common programming languages such as c, java and c++.
I vote "aye" to that. I'd also like to see a convention similar to
<ELSEIF>, or <ELSEINCLUDEIF> or something to that effect.
For example...
<INCLUDEIF PROPERTY="bean:[property]" VALUE="value1">
foo
<ELSEINCLUDEIF PROPERTY="bean:[property]" VALUE="value2">
bar
<ELSE>
>Of course what is the analog for the <excludeif> tag? Does
><excludeif><else></excludeif> make any sense? Or does it just
>give you a headache like it does me?
With the existance of <ELSE>, the need for <EXCLUDEIF> would go away.
For example:
<INCLUDEIF PROPERTY="bean:[property]" VALUE="value1">
do nothing
<ELSE>
foo
</INCLUDEIF>
And as Terry mentioned, it would make more sense to use <IF> <ELSEIF>
<ELSE>. Of course, this would require a closeing tag, perhaps </IF> ?
My .02
Stuart G. Hargreaves
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(W) 415.659.6314
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JSP-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
