Chris, I couldn't agree more! We were absolutely thrilled with the way we could use
the simple tags from the 0.92 spec. It was perfect for our business model where we
provide JavaBeans and a standard set of JSP pages to our customers. They will want
customize the pages for their needs, and so we want to make that as simple as possible
for them. It was a terrific selling point to show how simple the JSP's were, but how
powerful they could be in terms of presenting dynamically-generated data. Tags were
the perfect answer for us.
I can't understand why the pro-scriptlet crowd wants to take away our tags. I don't
have anything against scriptlets. They are great and extremely powerful. If you
don't like tags, don't use them. There's nothing wrong with supporting both
scriptlets AND tags. Hopefully, future versions of the spec will address these issues.
- Dave F.
Chris Fesler wrote:
> the absence of INCLUDEIF, EXCLUDEIF and LOOP are
> killing me. Let me give a quick & easy example.
>
> In the application I'm working on, UI writers often have the need to
> traverse a data set to make a table. In 0.92, this was accomplished in a
> really lovely way:
>
> <USEBEAN name="results" type="ResultsBean">
> ...
> <TABLE>
> <LOOP property="results:rows" propertyelement="row">
> <TR>
> <LOOP property="row:cells" propertyelement="cell">
> <TD><%= cell %></TD>
> </LOOP>
> </TR>
> </LOOP>
> </TABLE>
>
> This was great for the following reason: it was really easy for
> non-programmers to both understand and write (I know this from direct
> experience, incidentally). This is, for me & my customers, terrifically
> important.
>
> You can imagine what things look like now, but let me show you, if only for
> the cathartic effect I'm hoping it will have on me:
>
> <TABLE>
> <% RowBean[] rows = results.getRows();
> for (int i = 0; i < rows.length; i++) { %>
> <TR>
> <% CellBean[] cells = rows[i].getCells();
> for (int j = 0; j < cells.length; j++) { %>
> <TD><%= cells[j] %></TD>
> <% } %>
> </TR>
> <% } %>
> </TABLE>
>
> To me, this is heinous. It's ugly & error-prone to boot. To my customers, it
> may very well be incomprehensible (can you tell I'm unhappy? ;). I'm looking
> into solutions (if anybody on the list has one, please say so!) such as
> maybe creating some formatting beans (or even using IBM's JSP alphaBeans),
> but there's no way they will match the high degree of intuitiveness (for
> HTML coders) that the 0.92 version allows.
>
> Am I missing something here?
>
> chris
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
===========================================================================
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".
