Hey Taylor,
> > For several reasons I reached the conclusion that number 2 was far
> superior. I
> > don't have time to tell you all reasons right now, but a few ones are:
> > * One JSP per page with XML, not one per media.
> > * JSP only have a standard mapping for HTML, not for WML, PDF or other
> formats that
> > might be wanted.
>
> That's not true. JSP can output any kind of textual data. It doesn't
> handle output that is whitespace- sensitive very well at the moment, and
> doing binary data would probably not be desirable. But there is no
> intrinsic mapping of JSP to HTML.
>
Sure, it's no problem outputting textual data that's not HTML or XML. What I
meant with HTML mapping is that the JSP tags are adapted to be used with an
HTML or XML document. Using the <%= expression %> tag for example, is legal
in HTML, and using the <jsp:scriptlet> tag in the XML mapping for JSP is
equally legal. These two mappings are made to fit HTML and XML well.
There is no official mapping for any other textual lanuages yet, as far as I
know. I never claimed this made it impossible to produce output that isn't
HTML in a JSP. Note that I said that you very well could use JSP:s to output
WML directly.
Cheers,
Karl Avedal
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe: mailto [EMAIL PROTECTED] with body: "signoff JSP-INTEREST".
FAQs on JSP can be found at:
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/faq.html
http://www.esperanto.org.nz/jsp/jspfaq.html
