No, they are saying the page buffer declaration in the child include in
invalid as it is not supported in the spec.  What they quoted at me was:
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/tags/syntaxref.fm7.html
It is stated that  "Note that the page directive does not apply to any
dynamic included files;".

If I move the directive to the parent, it works (as you'd expect).  But what
should the behaviour be if the directive appears in the child?  BEA claim it
will be ignored.  And should the parent and child have separate JspWriters,
or the same one?

J.

-----Original Message-----
From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 May 2004 13:54
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Strange behaviour with buffers



Hi,
So BEA is telling you that if you say page buffer="64kb" and they give
you 12kb, that's the spec? ;)

Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics

________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to