Jason Lea wrote:
Look good...
You can probably move the vanity extension loop to be outside the main
loop because you only need loop throught the extensions once.
Is this going to have any issues with 'jsessionid' being added to the path?
Here I go replying to my own question No, the getSer
ig getModuleConfig(HttpServletRequest request) {
ModuleConfig mConfig =
(ModuleConfig) request.getAttribute(Globals.MODULE_KEY);
if (mConfig == null) {
mConfig =
(ModuleConfig)
config.getServletContext().getAttribute(Globals.MODULE_KEY);
}
return mConfig;
}
-Original M
: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:25 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: RE: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
[solved]
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Raible wrote:
> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:00:46 -0500
> From: Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Use
ptember 19, 2003 5:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
The best back button solution I found with source is here:
http://www.robertpenner.com/experiments/backbutton/backbutto
n_code.html
Click next row, next row; and then back button goes to
prio
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Matt Raible wrote:
> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:00:46 -0500
> From: Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Is i
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Joe Germuska wrote:
>
> I guess we'll see what happens; I'd been thinking about JSF and
> XForms as complementary, but then, my thinking was at a pretty
> superficial level.
>
They certainly can be -- writing a RenderKit for JavaServer Faces that
emitted the appropriate marku
Sadly, it's flash-based and it doesn't work in Mozilla.
Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Vic Cekvenich
> Sent: September 19, 2003 5:07 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* fr
e "fishing" page
vs.
> the general activities one.
>
> Thanks to all for your opinions and practices.
>
> Matt
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 11:33 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailin
>
> XForms is cool and all, but ...
>
> * Does anyone care? Even Microsoft (who would arguably need to be
> convinced to implement support for this to make it a viable
> real world standard)?
>
> * Does it deal with back buttons and bookmarks? I've read the XForms
> specs several times,
> By that argument, GUI apps should not ever disable menu
> options that are not relevant to the current state of
> the computation either -- instead, they should just
> leave the option enabled and "deal with it" when the user
> selects it. :-)
I don't think that's a fair comparison, because
remove *.do or /do/*
from the URL)
>
>XForms is cool and all, but ...
>
>* Does anyone care? Even Microsoft (who would arguably need to be
> convinced to implement support for this to make it a viable
> real world standard)?
For what it's worth, XML.com has a story th
XForms is cool and all, but ...
* Does anyone care? Even Microsoft (who would arguably need to be
convinced to implement support for this to make it a viable
real world standard)?
For what it's worth, XML.com has a story this week on "10 Favorite
XForms Engines": http://www.xml.com/pub/a/200
The best back button solution I found with source is here:
http://www.robertpenner.com/experiments/backbutton/backbutton_code.html
Click next row, next row; and then back button goes to prior row. And
you do not have to worry about browser compatibility (and it works on
PocketPC. Yes, I have been
The fundamental issues seem more related to HTTP than they are to any
particular presentation markup language. Got any insights on what is
going to replace this protocol?
Craig
> -Original Message-
> From: Max Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 09:29
>
whats out there doesnt exactly avoid the client
installation problem yet :-( )
-Original Message-
From: Max Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 09:29
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
I agree with
makes it easier to obey than to disobey.
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:28:39 -0700
> From: Max Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Is it possible to re
email messages to the struts-user list I could get this done. :-)
-Max
- Original Message -
From: "Kruse, Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:42 PM
Subject: RE: Is it possible to rem
ers Mailing List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:47 PM
Subject: RE: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
> The reason I don't like extension mapping is because I think path-mapping
> (/do/*) is cleaner. Also, I like using path-m
- Original Message -
From: "Kruse, Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 3:42 PM
Subject: RE: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
> > The important pri
11:33 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
I use .Whatever, where that is some marketing term that is acceptable.
At 10:39 AM 9/18/2003 -0400, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
How about a hack:
*.jsp
It looks as jsp on top but it
--- "Kruse, Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The important principle here is "Web Application
> != Web
> > Site".
>
> Why? In many cases, it's the same difference. These
> days, web "sites"
> usually are web "applications" on the back-end.
> There are a lot of stupid
> users out there. In
> The important principle here is "Web Application != Web
> Site".
Why? In many cases, it's the same difference. These days, web "sites"
usually are web "applications" on the back-end. There are a lot of stupid
users out there. In many cases, every attempt needs to be made to cater to
them.
>
Cool :-)
-Original Message-
From: Blake Whitmore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 04:21
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
We've incorporated a *.fish mapping for our site :)
The client was p
te:
>
> > Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:39:51 -0400
> > From: Vic Cekvenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or
> /do/* from the URL
ces.
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Micael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 11:33 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
I use .Whatever, where that is some marketing term that is acce
hehe, if you want to get them worried use *.exe
;-)
-Original Message-
From: Micael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 01:33
To: Struts Users Mailing List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
I use .Whatever, where
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:26 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
The important principle here is "Web Application != Web Site". If your
users feel compelled to use bookmarks and the back button in your webapps,
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Mainguy, Mike wrote:
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:36:39 -0400
> From: "Mainguy, Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sub
or /do/* from the URL
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:39:51 -0400
> From: Vic Cekvenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:39:51 -0400
> From: Vic Cekvenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from t
x.html and then use a filter
(mapped to *.html) to do a redirect to http://site.com/do/activities.
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:26 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:26 AM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
The important principle here is "Web Application != Web Site". If your
users feel compelled to use bookmarks and the back button in y
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Matt Raible wrote:
> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:50:42 -0500
> From: Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Users Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Is it possible to remove *.do or /do/* from the URL
>
> First
33 matches
Mail list logo
