Re: [Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

Mehdi Bahribayli ha scritto: <%@ taglib uri="http://xplanner.org/xplanner-taglib"; prefix="xplanner" %> ... iteration.editor.edit_prefix ... Take a look at 'conent' tag source code. This can give you some idea. It's better not to do it: it's LGPL and coders minds (me incl

Re: [Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

>Greg Reddin ha scritto: >> >> Default Header Stuff >> >> Default Body Stuff >> >> Default Footer Stuff >> >> Then you extend it with a page like this: >> >> >> >> Extended/Overridden Body Content >> >> > >It seems that alrea

Re: [Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

On 8/30/06, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: P.S.: Should we use [Tiles 2.0] when referring to new Tiles? I asked this because the site it is written to use [tiles] instead (anyway [Tiles 2.0] is much clearer). It's just a tag for those who want to filter on the subject line... I wo

Re: [Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

Greg Reddin ha scritto: Default Header Stuff Default Body Stuff Default Footer Stuff Then you extend it with a page like this: Extended/Overridden Body Content It seems that already accepts the body so it "potentially"

Re: [Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

Greg Reddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One thing that has often bothered me about Tiles in a standalone web application is the need for a JSP page that "calls" a tiles definition. Consider the following from the Tiles 2.0 test application: tiles-defs.xml

[Tiles 2.0] Tiles Without Intermediate Pages WAS: [tiles] page content

One thing that has often bothered me about Tiles in a standalone web application is the need for a JSP page that "calls" a tiles definition. Consider the following from the Tiles 2.0 test application: tiles-defs.xml In this case y