Ok, here it is: http://jira.opensymphony.com/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?id=21459
Have been off from webwork for a long time, surprise that this haven't get any attention yet ( may be its just me that use this a lot ... ) Btw, is there any plan to move to jdk1.4 ( for e.g, using the new exception chaining api, etc ) ? Regards, Low --- Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Heng, > Can you add this as an issue on > jira.opensymphony.com? That way it won't be > overlooked in future versions! > > -Pat > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Heng Sin Low" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 4:35 PM > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] xwork suggestions > > > > One minor complain though: > > > > <webwork:property value="x" id="xyz"/> > > > > will will grab the value of x and print it > althoguh > > all I want is to make x avaiable as a request > > attribute with name 'xyz'. > > > > Regards, > > Low > > --- Mike Cannon-Brookes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I'm with Hani - property tag should stay as is. > > > > > > IMHO it's a documentation problem that is easily > > > solved - once you > > > understand it - it's simple? > > > > > > For the dummies: > > > > > > <ww:property> has TWO uses: > > > > > > 1: <ww:property value="x" /> will grab the value > of > > > x and print it > > > 2: <ww:property value="x"> ... </ww:property> > will > > > grab the value of x and > > > make it 'available' between the tags. > > > > > > That's it! > > > > > > Some more examples of fun to be had (from my > 'teach > > > ww to the coworkers' > > > spiel) > > > > > > <ww:property value="x/y"> will print > getX().getY() > > > > > > <ww:property /> will print what's on the top of > the > > > stack (very useful to > > > debug where you are! > > > > > > Why is #2 above useful? It makes your code > simpler > > > and easier to read! > > > > > > <ww:property value="someUser"> > > > <ww:property value="name" /> > > > <ww:property value="fullName" /> > > > <ww:property value="email" /> > > > </ww:property> > > > > > > -mike > > > > > > > > > On 1/11/02 9:08 AM, "Hani Suleiman" > > > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) penned the words: > > > > > > > While I agree that it's somewhat unintuitive > to > > > have one tag serve > > > > these two purposes, I don't think it should be > > > changed. If someone were > > > > confused by how it worked, they'd go to the > docs > > > that talk about that > > > > tag, which would in turn describe both modes, > if > > > you will. That > > > > 'clarity' can come across as docs, it doesn't > > > require a non-backward > > > > compatible code change. To use your OS > analogy, > > > how would you like it > > > > if a new distro of linux decided that some > unix > > > command is unintuitive, > > > > and decided to modify its name to better > reflect > > > its function, rather > > > > than document its existing 'quirks' in a man > page? > > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 04:55 PM, > boxed > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>> 1) No - the action tag is useful! > > > >> Yea, Pat gave a good creative example of why > it's > > > good. I find your > > > >> argument > > > >> very enlightening though. > > > >> > > > >>> 2) Why? The property tag is flexible - not > > > confusing! > > > >> Unix has two commands: cd and cat. cd changes > > > directory. cat prints the > > > >> contents of a file. Two different commands to > do > > > two different things. > > > >> In > > > >> webwork however we have a single command to > do > > > both these things and > > > >> it's > > > >> called "property", which btw doesn't really > say > > > much. Had an operating > > > >> system had a command like that you would not > be > > > pleased: > > > >> > > > >> c:\> property foo > > > >> c:\foo>property bar.txt > > > >> contents of bar.txt > > > >> c:\foo> > > > >> > > > >> How logical is that really? Besides the > obvious > > > readability aspects of > > > >> having a tag for printing a property and > another > > > for modifying the > > > >> stack, > > > >> the code for PropertyTag (or rather > > > BasicPropertyTag in the CVS > > > >> version) is > > > >> rather ugly due to the fact that it's really > two > > > tags. If nothing > > > >> else, the > > > >> code should reflect this with one > > > PrintPropertyTag and another > > > >> PushPropertyTag. Changing BasicPropertyTag to > do > > > exactly what it does > > > >> not > > > >> but doing it by extending PrintPropertyTag > would > > > be trivial and open up > > > >> possibilities for the users. It would also > make > > > the code more > > > >> orthogonal and > > > >> readable. > > > >> > > > >> // Anders Hovmöller > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence > the > > > future > > > >> of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java > Community > > > >> Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. > > > >> > > > > > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0004en > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > > >> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence > the > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
