You're missing my point. It's not to bring up the issue again. I repeat:
It's not to bring up the issue again. Again, I repeat: It's not to bring up
the issue.
It's to point out that our perspective is not that of the common end user.
It's to say that saying, "because it makes sense" is not good enough (as I
was just told a bit ago by Maurice and Rickard). The issue of property tag
is nothing to me (I use ww:property, always will), but the issue of folks
discarding suggestions not on the merit of the argument FOR the change, but
on the reason for keeping things as is. Following this logic, this project
will get nowhere fast. No one ever addressed the reasons for the issue, only
that the introducing two new tags would complicate the matter. That was not
the issue raised. The issue raised was that property tag does two things and
does not follow good design practices.
Adding it to the documentation is fine. But then that argument is now
working against other suggestions -- such as configuration. Couldn't we just
say, "we'll add it to the docs"? To be quite honest, I find many folks on
this list to be quite contradictory. In some cases things should be so
simple they work without looking at documentation (views.properties), in
other cases things are so confusing that documentation must be written to
explain it (ww:property). Logical? You be the judge...
-Pat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] ui:hidden and ui:submit
> Argh, give up! We've argued propertytag to death, we agreed that the
solution
> is to ensure the documentation is clear. Enough already!
>
> I'm reminded of the boy who cried wolf, to be honest. If someone keeps
> repeating the same thing over and over again (that others disagree with),
then
> when that person actually says something insightful that's worth listening
to,
> people will assume it's the same old nonsense just out of sheer habit.
>
> Quoting Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Agreed! But please don't loose site of the ww:property tag arguments
> > either.
> > It really is doing two jobs and the only reason we like it (I like it
too!)
> > and it makes sense (makes sense to me!) is because we've grown
accustomed
> > to
> > it. But you cannot deny it is doing two different jobs: push and print.
An
> > intuitive design would be to have two different tags. It's what is
logical
> > for the majority of people not familiar with WebWork. So a compromise
would
> > be to keep ww:property but add ww:push and ww:print.
> >
> > -Pat
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:09 PM
> > Subject: [OS-webwork] ui:hidden and ui:submit
> >
> >
> > > Actually, while I've pretty much agreed with Maurice on every single
> > point
> > he's
> > > made, this is one case where I agree that ui:hidden and ui:submit
would
> > make
> > > sense.
> > >
> > > Webwork is proud of the fact that it's so skinnable. The fact that you
> > can
> > > easily swap in templates for any form elements is tremendously useful.
> > Picture
> > > a 'debug' skin, which would actually display the hidden tags. Now
isn't
> > that so
> > > much nicer than having to trawl through a source view of your html?
> > >
> > > The same argument can be made for submit buttons/imgs, I think. It's
just
> > > pleasant being able to swap so easily, it'd give that exact warm fuzzy
> > feeling
> > > I get when I trivially change one line somewhere to make all my
> > textfields
> > have
> > > a cute question mark next to them that points to live help, or define
> > > a 'required' parameter that automatically highlights them, etc etc.
> > >
> > > Quoting Patrick Lightbody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > > > Anders has had a good point all along. <ww:property/> is really
doing
> > two
> > > > jobs: push and print. We are all OK with it because we're used to
it.
> > But
> > > > his post below of course looks completely silly... why would you
want
> > > > <ww:property/> to do push, print, AND include. That's just silly,
> > right?
> > > >
> > > > Well, now move your perspective to someone who hasn't used
> > <ww:property/>
> > > > for 2 years. Move it to a WebWork newbie, but someone who is still
> > smart
> > > > and
> > > > can see the obvious misnomer of "property". Try real hard before you
> > > > dismiss
> > > > it. Open your mind up. And then remember you can still have property
> > for
> > > > compatibility and for people that are used to it, but <ww:print
> > > > property="foo"/> and <ww:push property="foo">...</ww:push> would
make a
> > > > hell
> > > > of a lot more sense.
> > > >
> > > > OK, now let's think about <ui:hidden/>, another good idea shot down.
> > > > Imagine
> > > > you are new to webwork, but you're a good developer that has never
read
> > > > much
> > > > documentation, since most good APIs just work like they should. So
you
> > > > wrote
> > > > a JSP with <ui:textfield/> and <ui:select/>, and then, since hidden
is
> > just
> > > > another type of input, you decided to write <ui:hidden/>, since that
> > makes
> > > > sense (I mean, you've got a UI tag for everything else). Again, try
> > hard
> > > > before you dismiss it. Don't say, "well hidden doesn't need error
> > messages,
> > > > so we shouldn't include it". Open your mind up -- try to be THAT
person
> > > > described above. It's a matter of doing what a smart newbie would
most
> > > > likely do. I know I would. I just had to add a hidden tag to a JSP
page
> > > > that
> > > > used exclusively JSP taglibs (WebWork's UI tags as well as some
custom
> > > > helpers). But since there was no hidden, I crapped up the JSP with
> > HTML.
> > > > Does that really make sense -- especially for an incredibly small
> > addition
> > > > that completes the set of mapping from WebWork tags to HTML <input>
> > tags?
> > > >
> > > > -Pat
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:29 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] more flexible property tag
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Again, that age old question....why? Why this hatred of the
unloved
> > and
> > > > > unappreciate if/iterator tags? What have they ever done to you?
> > > > >
> > > > > Quoting boxed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I've had a most enlightening conversation on irc recently. A
friend
> > of
> > > > mine
> > > > > > pointed out that property tag and iterator tag can be merged:
> > > > > > <ww:property value="foo">
> > > > > > do something
> > > > > > </ww:property>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > can iterate through the values if foo is a collection.
Furthermore,
> > we
> > > > can
> > > > > > merge the property tag and the if tag:
> > > > > > <ww:property value="foo">
> > > > > > do something
> > > > > > </ww:property>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > will "do something" if foo evaluates to not null (and if it's a
> > boolean
> > > > > > type
> > > > > > to true). But wait! There's more! We can also merge it with the
> > include
> > > > > > tag:
> > > > > > <ww:property value="'foo.jsp'"/>
> > > > > > can do an include if "foo.jsp" exists. We can also make it
handle
> > > > actions:
> > > > > > <ww:property value="'foo.action'"/>
> > > > > > can do just what <ww:action value="'foo.action'"/> does today if
> > the
> > > > string
> > > > > > evaluates to an action!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You wanted a flexible property tag mike ("The property tag is
> > flexible
> > > > -
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > confusing!" as you so nicely put it). Time you show that you
mean
> > it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > // Anders Hovmvller
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS. Yes it's sarcasm, but note that the first two examples are
real
> > > > world
> > > > > > example from my friends version of the property tag for his
> > framework
> > > > DS.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> > > > > > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> > > > > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > >
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> > > > > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> > > > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> > > > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> > > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> > > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> > > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
> Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
> _______________________________________________
> Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
