I think this type of break with the past is exactly what Xwork 2.0 SHOULD be for. Leave the property tag in there, but mark it as deprecated with links to the new, much more intuitive tags (although I don't think we need separate push and pop tags, just the ww:context).
If we can't ever change anything, then how will Xwork ever improve? -----Original Message----- From: Maurice Parker [mailto:maurice.parker@;pmic.com] Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 1:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Property tag (beating the decomposed horse) Patrick Lightbody wrote: >You might not like Anders for the changes he made without asking, but >this this stubbornness is pretty sickening. > > Patrick, this is nothing personal. This is a logistical decision. 1) Changing the behavior of the PropertyTag hurts our userbase. 2) Adding addional tags makes the PropertyTag (and the taglibs as a whole) more confusing, not less. It's not about being stubborn. It's about making decisions based on facts and analysis rather than emotionally charged debate. If you want me to change my position on this matter, you have to convince me that a change is for the greater benifit of the community. As it stands right now, I believe that the proposed change would in fact have the opposite effect. -Maurice >-Pat > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:01 AM >Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Property tag (beating the decomposed >horse) > > > > >>It's a different approach I suppose. >> >>I didn't know of the TWO uses of the propertytag, let alone the 3 >>uses. >> >> >I'm not > > >>angry or irritated at anyone because of it, in fact, I was rather >> >> >delighted when > > >>I found out the other uses. I'm glad they're documented now. Most of >>all however, I like the fact that I was able to use propertytag >>without >> >> >reading any > > >>docs. I like the fact that I was using the valuestack without even >> >> >understanding > > >>what it is, or how and why it's working its magic. Maybe adding more >>tags >> >> >will > > >>make that easier, it just doesn't feel that way though based on all >>the discussion here. >> >>Quoting Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >> >>>Agreed. While I'm not a regular WW user these days due to >>>circumstances beyond my control (and I use Velocity with WW rather >>>that JSP anyway), I still try to keep abreast of WW's progress. From >>>what I've read of this debate, one thing is readily apparent. The >>>existing property tag is >>> >>> >*not* > > >>>intuitive. To quote an earlier comment from Mike: >>> >>>"Well, I actually wrote the original two uses of the PropertyTag >>>(which >>> >>> >you > > >>>are correct - is in fact 3, would you believe I didn't know about the >>> >>> >third > > >>>one? ;))" >>> >>>Correct me if I'm wrong but I am sure that Mike uses WW extensively, >>>and has been doing so for quite some time. If even he didn't know all >>>the subtleties >>>of that tag, what chance does a newbie have? Documentation alone isn't >>> >>> >the > > >>>best solution - docs plus intuitive design is. Has anyone here ever >>> >>> >tried > > >>>to >>>use all the various permutations of the struts <html:select> tag for >>>iteration? There is a lot of documentation for that tag, and I've >>>been using it for quite some time now. But almost without fail I >>>still have to >>> >>> >either > > >>>cut'n'paste existing code, or refer to the documentation to get the >>>damn thing working each and every time! >>> >>>I haven't looked at the replacement tags Anders has submitted so I >>>can't comment on whether those are 'better' or not, but I would >>>encourage everyone in this debate to think about what the taglib >>>should look like in a >>> >>> >perfect > > >>>world, ie *without regard for what currently exists*. THAT should >>>then become the goal for XWork 2.0. Obviously backwards compatibility >>>is crucial, but deprecation can take care of that if need be. >>> >>>Chris >>> >>> >>>"Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >>>news:CD44D03584C7A249A3F86891B24EB8EA03FDCAB9@;ehost003.intermedia.net >>>... >>>Yeah, not like the current ever-so-transparent ww:property tag that >>>everyone >>>just understands without any explanation. >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Hani Suleiman [mailto:hani@;formicary.net] >>>Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 7:34 AM >>>Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Property tag (beating the decomposed horse) >>> >>> >>>Excellent! A great way of ensuring nobody is able to use webwork >>>without first going through lots of docs. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------- >>>This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>>Welcome to geek heaven. >>>http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Opensymphony-webwork mailing list >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------- >>This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >>Welcome to geek heaven. >>http://thinkgeek.com/sf >>_______________________________________________ >>Opensymphony-webwork mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork >> >> > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >Welcome to geek heaven. >http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ >Opensymphony-webwork mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
