I assert the following: "You could override the ActionForm associated with this <html:form/> by using the scope and type attribute. The scope specifies where to look for the ActionForm, and the type specifies what type of ActionForm it is, i.e., the fully qualified Java classname. This technique is not used in practice very often, but it is good to know that it exists."
Example, <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="arcmind.MyForm"/> I've thought of a few reasons why you want to do this, but they seemed fairly lame. Can someone give me a valid use case where you would need this feature? QUESTION: Why not just specify the Form in the action mapping? The <html:form /> tag renders an HTML form. The <html:form/> is associated with an action mapping by the action attribute. The action attribute specifies the path of the action mapping. Therefore, when the user submits the form the action associated with the ActionMapping will be invoked (if the form is valid). It is interesting that this tag inspect the ActionMapping and finds the ActionForm associated with the ActionMapping. If the ActionForm is in scope, the property values of the ActionForm will be rendered as the values in the HTML form field of the <html:form/>. In fact if the ActionMapping has an error (e.g., points to in valid ActionForm), the page with the <html:form/> will never display until you fix the ActionMapping. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]