Greg Reddin ha scritto:
So are you suggesting we use 2 different tags to insert a definition
as opposed to an attribute? That seems like a good idea.
I added a JIRA issue for that:
http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SB-55
Notice that I suggested to split tiles:insert into
Greg Reddin ha scritto:
I don't know. Having used Tiles for a while, I'm used to the way
things are. It doesn't bother me to use the same overloaded tag in
two different ways. I'm not sure if it's confusing to the users or not.
I don't know if it's the same for you, but in my mind a tile
Yeah, I can accept that definition.
Greg
On Oct 10, 2006, at 1:40 AM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
Greg Reddin ha scritto:
I don't know. Having used Tiles for a while, I'm used to the way
things are. It doesn't bother me to use the same overloaded tag
in two different ways. I'm not sure if
Re-Re-Hi again
I know I am bugging you again but I have another idea.
Personally I don't like using the same tiles:insert tag to define
attributes in a layout page and to insert templates/definitions/strings:
I think the concept of attribute is separated from the rest (it is
somewhat like
Maybe we need tiles:insertDefintion and tiles:insertAttribute to
handle the 2 types specifically instead of one tiles:insert to
handle them generically.
I don't know. Having used Tiles for a while, I'm used to the way
things are. It doesn't bother me to use the same overloaded tag in
