My experience is the same as yours. That while the ".do" can be omitted in the action definition, it may not be omitted in the forward. FWIW, I think this is proper behavior. Certainly if you html:link to the forward your html pages will be do-less. Also, you can change to another scheme (e.g., "/action/login") simply by modifying the structs-config.
-----Original Message----- From: Bailey, Shane C. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 6:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Is this a bug with struts config file? Short version: I would think that I could do this then <forward name="home" path="/home"/> and Struts would know to add the .do for me. When a <html:link forward="home"> is rendered it does not have the .do on it. I have to make it <forward name="home" path="/home.do"/> Is that a bug? Since Struts determines extensions on the fly (at Servlet startup based on URL pattern in web.xml) it just seems defeating that you would have to hard code an extension anywhere in the system. Longer version: In my crusade to wipe out all hard coded ".do" extensions in the app for future upgradability (for instance all my links are like this <html:link action="/login"...> instead of "login.do" I found that (unless something is not right) the global-forwardS don't act as I would expect. It implies in the struts config dtd that if contextRelative not true then the path is module relative. It seems minor but if I need to change the extension to ".go" or something else, say, because if a hacker doesn't know you are using Struts because the extension is ".poo" then it may help the system. But in order to make the change I would have to go into all my many struts config files and globally replace ".do". Not too bad if I am doing it but when someone else in the group with less experience does it then it could be a pain. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
