Quick note that the name, scope, and type attributes of <html:form> are deprecated as of 1.1 and, AFAIK, have been removed in the current codebase. So, if there is a compelling use for them, it would be a good idea to address it through Bugzilla ASAP.
Quoting Glenn Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Richard, > > It seems to me that this would be useful for run-time decisions about where > to "send" the form data. Perhaps if a low-level user and an admin should see > the same html form, but the ActionForm that handles the admin's work should > be different. i.e.: > > <c:choose> > <c:when test="${userIsAdmin}"> > <c:set var="type" value="com.foo.Bar" /> > </c:when> > <c:otherwise> > <c:set var="type" value="com.foo.BarSubClass" /> > </c:otherwise> > </c:choose> > > <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="${type}" name="myform" > /> > <!-- HTML HERE --> > > I'm not sure if the html:form can take dynamic params like that (never tried > it!) Regardless of the syntax, it seems like you could share the same JSP, > subclass the ActionForm, and save yourself from creating a ton of duplicate > code. You'd probably still have to add an ActionForm mapping in > struts-config for each form, but at least you'd have only one JSP and Action > class. Perhaps changing the scope dynamically like this could potentially > change the ActionForm stored in the session as well? Did I miss something? > > Regards, > Glenn > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Hightower [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 9:11 AM > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: RE: low priority question about html:form > > > Oppsss > > the code listig should read: > > <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="arcmind.MyForm" > name="myform"/> > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Hightower [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:08 AM > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: low priority question about html:form > > > > 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. -- Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]