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]
