Re: [struts-dev] Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-18 Thread Antonio Petrelli
2008/3/17, Dale Newfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]: We can avoid the JS requirement if we make the submit button's submitted value complex enough to encode the names of the namespace and actionname. The problem is that the value of the submit button is what the users sees. You don't want your user

Re: [struts-dev] Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-18 Thread Dale Newfield
Antonio Petrelli wrote: 2008/3/17, Dale Newfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]: We can avoid the JS requirement if we make the submit button's submitted value complex enough to encode the names of the namespace and actionname. The problem is that the value of the submit button is what the users sees.

Re: [struts-dev] Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-17 Thread Jeromy Evans
Dale Newfield wrote: Jeromy Evans wrote: Shouldn't validation just be fixed? What you really want to say in the s:submit tag is run this action instead what we're currently saying is run this method instead. Because of this, you're getting different validation than you want because

Re: Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-17 Thread Antonio Petrelli
2008/3/16, Dale Newfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I propose that instead of having a method attribute on the submit tag that works w/o js in the client, but requires some black magic on the server side, we add an action attribute to the submit tag that uses js on the client to change the form

Re: [struts-dev] Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-17 Thread Dale Newfield
Antonio Petrelli wrote: Sincerely I don't like to put js where it is not necessary. Agreed, although I'm much less worried about this today than I was 5 years ago. If you don't know it, Struts 1 has LookupDispatchAction that makes a reverse-lookup in a resource bundle to retrieve the key

Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-16 Thread Dale Newfield
As evidenced by the diffulties described on the user list in Wildcard mapping should not suck (but does), I propose that instead of having a method attribute on the submit tag that works w/o js in the client, but requires some black magic on the server side, we add an action attribute to the

Re: Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-16 Thread Jeromy Evans
Shouldn't validation just be fixed? The root problem is that validation only uses the action alias and doesn't check if a method name is provided in a parameter. The user of a wildcard just works-around that limitation to creating an alias it can match. For historical reasons there's at

Re: [struts-dev] Alternate submit tag...

2008-03-16 Thread Dale Newfield
Jeromy Evans wrote: Shouldn't validation just be fixed? What you really want to say in the s:submit tag is run this action instead what we're currently saying is run this method instead. Because of this, you're getting different validation than you want because changing the method doesn't