Re[2]: [Webwork-user] SOAP and Webwork - does it make sense

2002-07-09 Thread Peter Kelley
Moved to developer list for technical discussion. Saturday, July 6, 2002, 6:58:02 AM, Matt Baldree wrote: MB> - Original Message - MB> From: "Toby Hede" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MB> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MB> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MB> Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 10:34 PM MB> Subject:

[Webwork-user] WebWorkVelocityServlet views

2002-07-09 Thread G.L. Grobe
Still trying to figure this one out. Below is my original action where I would compare the values of 'view' and return a view mapping pending the value of view ... public class Products extends ActionSupport implements ParameterAware { private Map params; ... public void setParameters(Ma

Re: [Webwork-user] Session (Map) contents.

2002-07-09 Thread Toby Hede
The rules will still apply. I might be way off here, but it is my understanding that implementing the SessionAware interface simply allows the ActionContext to pass in the HTTPSession Map for access. See action.factory.SessionMap, action.factory.ActionFactory > > Hello, > > >I'm curious...

[Webwork-user] Session (Map) contents.

2002-07-09 Thread Ryan LeCompte
Hello, I'm curious... do the objects that are stored in the session object within an action required to implement the java.io.Serializable interface? I know that objects placed in HttpSession must be, but it appears that WebWork presents the programmer with just a plain Map. Do the rules st

[Webwork-user] Why I like WebWork

2002-07-09 Thread Mike Cannon-Brookes
Ok - so if you're on this list you probably don't need convincing, but I should post it anyway :) http://radio.weblogs.com/0107789/stories/2002/07/09/whyILikeWebwork.html Enjoy. -mike -- ATLASSIAN - http://www.atlassian.com Expert J2EE Software, Services and Support ---