I thought it was Polish notation -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Barefoot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 4:52 PM To: Struts Users Mailing List Subject: RE: stuts-config.xml file
Like I said, no negative criticism or finger-pointing from my quarter, just an observation. Thanks for telling me this--it actually bolsters my point. They probably settled on these terms because they were familiar to people who were hip to the "current nomenclature" at the time. Ah, screw it, let's just use Hungarian notation for everything--everybody's familiar with it, right?! (just kidding) > -----Original Message----- > From: Galbreath, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 1:11 PM > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' > Subject: RE: stuts-config.xml file > > > The Struts team didn't invent these terms - they adapted them from (then) > current nomenclature. For example, see David Geary's "Advanced JavaServer > Pages," Chapter 6 (Sun/Prentice-Hall, 2001). > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph Barefoot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:04 PM > > I agree 100% with Muki's observations. Some of the Struts tag-libs also > suffer from similar non-intuitive naming schemes. Identifiers should be > meaningful and descriptive, period, no matter what file format or local > context they are found in. > > This is not a negative criticism, so everyone sheath their fangs > please; it > is a common problem of our industry that intimate familiarity can create > results that lack clarity for those without that degree of familiarity. > Unfortunately, we don't have enough time to become experts at everything, > else this would not be an issue. > > ...but at least with Struts, it's well-documented. :) Were it not for the > comprehensive JavaDocs, I would've been in serious trouble. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Soomar, Muki (R.) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 11:43 AM > > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' > > Subject: RE: stuts-config.xml file > > > > > > Leonardo, > > Make sense for the cross-reference in the <form-bean> element. I am not > > too hung up on anything - really, just that I had to scratch my > > head a few times > > on some of the element names and their attribute names, which completely > > defeats the purpose of XML config files. XML has to be readable > > ..and understandable, > > as should any code be - right ? ;) > > > > Muki > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leonardo Maciel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:33 PM > > To: Struts Users Mailing List > > Subject: RE: stuts-config.xml file > > > > > > > > The javadocs has a brief explanation of the properties defined on > > struts-config.xml > > See Class ActionMapping at: > > http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/doc-1.0.2/api/index.html > > > > > > For me, the only not too intuitive tag is "name". > > But since it is a reference to the form name declared on the > > <form-bean> section it sounds good enough. Definitely not "form-class" > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Holmes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:28 PM > > To: Struts Users Mailing List > > Subject: Re: stuts-config.xml file > > > > > > Muki-- > > > > The names in the config files/DTDs can seem very > > counter intuitive. Managing the files by hand in > > general is cumbersome and that's why I developed the > > Struts Console software. > > > > http://www.jamesholmes.com/struts/ > > > > I'm adding some functionality in the near future that > > will give explanations for each element and their > > attributes thus making it easier for newbies to get up > > to speed. > > > > -james > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --- "Soomar, Muki (R.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am still new to struts and going through the > > > documentation. > > > Here are some general questions for the gurus who > > > understand the > > > DTDs for struts-config.xml file and its usage. > > > > > > <action> element > > > 1. Why is the attribute "type" for the <action> > > > element named so. Wouldnt > > > the attribute name "action-class" be more intuitive > > > here ? > > > > > > 2(a). Attribute "name" for the same <action> element > > > refers to the > > > form. Again "form-class" would have been more > > > intuitive. > > > > > > 2(b) Attribute "attribute" also refers to the form > > > class for the example application. > > > I am confused between the usage of the two. (Still > > > need to do a bit more digging, > > > but intuitive attribute names would have helped in > > > the first reading very much !) > > > > > > 3. Attribute "input" is intuitive, but "input-uri" > > > or "input-url" would have been > > > more intuitive > > > > > > 4. Sub-element <forward> has attribute "name" that > > > refers to the type of > > > result based on which forwards could be redirected. > > > Wouldnt it be simpler > > > to just call this attribute "result-type" instead of > > > "name". > > > > > > Any particular reasons for this naming convention. I > > > just figured, I have > > > to carry another mapper in my head to figure out the > > > true meaning of these > > > attributes. Maybe, I need to interpret them in a > > > different manner. > > > > > > Any feed back would be much appreciated. Thanks and > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Muki Soomar > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience > > http://launch.yahoo.com > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
