> > > I asked for an example where you actually need EL -> can't > achieve the > > same with (standard) tags. > > Oh, ok. No, you are right, all the EL expressions do is make > my page look a little cleaner vs using c:out. Not that big of > a deal I guess, however they are nice for certain things...
Actually I was saying the opposite :-) EL makes your page looking "uglier"... I mean, you can write ${bean.boolProp?'Yes, I am an idiot':'No, not an idiot'} Or <% bean.boolProp?"Yes, I am an idiot":"No, not an idiot" %> I think the idea of tags was the elimination of scriptlets, and now you bring them back through the back door. > > For examle... say I wanted to quickly change the color of a > class var for table row color based on the index... > > I could just do... > > <tr class="${status.index % 2 != 0? 'odd':'even'}"> > > Granted I should make a tag that does this (and I did), but > it was just for illustration and it seems cleaner than going > the whole <c:choose> route imo. I prefer the tag. <tr class="<xyz:switchStyle/>"> looks easier to read for me, and also for a web designer, and I think, one of our goals should be, not to write jsps by ourselfs, but enable a html-producer to create pages. And they can handle documented and explained tags, but not over-powered EL. > > Or, as in the intial question posed, where you wanted to > display different things based on a boolean... > > ${bean.boolProp?'Yes, I am an idiot':'No, not an idiot'} What about logic:equal? Requires more lines, true, but c:choose would be as readable as the above line. Or even a logic:select (not there yet, true, but not a big deal). And now the 'deadly' anti-EL argument: With tags you have at least some, not full, but some, compile time type checking :-) Leon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]