On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Rickard �berg wrote: > Hani Suleiman wrote: > > I strongly suspect that swing/non web usage makes up 1% or less of all > > the users. Lets not make this unpleasant for the silent majority just to > > win a marketing line or two or some coolness points by saying 'we have > > nothing to do with the web!'. xwork should be targeted at the web, and > > should make the life of web developers a lot more pleasant and fun. It > > should NOT enforce that though and should work well outside of it, but > > web people should definitely be the main target audience. > > The abovew pretty much sums up my thoughts as well.
I agree, although I'd err on the side of the non-web clients. Binding mappings to urls means we need to think hard about what possible urls are allowed - because this could be REALLY useful. Imagine a namespace like "xwork://login" - that's a url, not bound to the web, and doesn't expose the action to the client at all... --------------------------------------------------------- Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
