On 3/27/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/27/06, Michael Jouravlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 3/27/06, Gabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > for the tag prefix, I am actually thinking "html" might be best. > > > While Struts Action 2 is supposed to be a "revolution" in order > > > for us to keep the community behind it, we ought to make it > > > seem as much of an "evolution" as possible. (Otherwise, why > > > wouldn't a struts developer look at this as the opportunity to try > > > something completely different?) Therefore, I think using html > > > for the ww form tags etc would be ideal. > > > > I like "html" prefix especially if the taglib could be portable to, > > say, SAF 1.3 or even to plain JSP environment. > > Noted.
As we all know, the prefix that is actually used is up to the individual developer, but most of them tend to copy our examples :-). If I were a Struts 1.x user, and saw the "html" prefix on SAF 2.x tags, I would expect the functionality to be fundamentally similar. If that's what ends up happening, then this is a pretty good suggestion. But I fear it would be confusing if the tags are radically different (i.e. improved :-). ISTR there was also an idea floating around some of the early discussions that SAF 2.x might want to support the Struts 1.x tags as a "legacy" library, similar in spirit to creating a compatibility layer to talk to Struts 1.x action classes. If that path was followed, it would make more sense to keep "html" for this library and use something else for the new one. > I suggest to analyze all tags and to deprecate everything that is > > already supported in JSTL 1.0. WW features that duplicate features of > > JSTL 1.1 should be considered "half-deprecated" since a lot of people > > still use Tomcat4 (my provider quoted me $50 for upgrade to Tomcat5, > > nah). JSP 2.0 has new features like resource messages support, SAF2 > > should promote using these more generic J2EE features instead of > > proprietary tags and property files. > > The tags are listed here, Michael, if you'd lke to run through them. > > * http://wiki.opensymphony.com/display/WW/Tags > > The UI tags are quite a bit different that the Action 1 taglibs. Aside > from generating markup, many also observe a stylesheet, giving them > capabilities beyond what is offered with JSTL alone. The UI tags are > also value-stack aware, allowing expressions that are not supported by > standard JSTL. Though, I understand that the UI tags are JSTL aware > and be mixed-and-matched with JSTL tags, as needed. > > > > SAF2 should also make clear what platform it targets. Stripes, for > > example, uses Java5 specifically for annotations and other internal > > niceties like typed collections. Should SAF2 target JDK1.4 or Java5? > > Should it target JSP1.2+JSTL1.0 or JSP2.0? I think that JSP2.0 is a > > better target and JSP pages are much cleaner, but there should be > > compatibility package for JSP1.2, kind of like Tomcat5 has for JDK1.4. > > Webwork 2.2 targetrs JDK 1.4, and I would suggest we stay that course, > since I believe it it what most of the committers, including myself, > are using in production. The UI tags look and feel like ordinary JSP > tags, under the covers, the markups is being created with FreeMarker > templates. (See same reference.) > > Meanwhlie, some work is being done on Java 5 extensions. I believe > Shale is doing the same. > > * http://wiki.opensymphony.com/display/WW/J2SE+5+Support Shale's current annotations are described here[1] -- see subpackages "managed", "register", and "view". However, most of them are pretty specific to JSF at the moment. One thing I'd also like to look at is integrating XWork interceptor stacks directly into Shale, at both the local (calling a particular action method) and global (in the application controller filter, where you can currently customize the "all requests" processing with Commons Chain) locations. If that works out, then it should be possible to use any XWork-based annotations directly. In another thread, there was talk about using a consistent approach to > annotations between Shale, Action 2, and Stecks (Action 1 - > http://www.realsolve.co.uk/site/strecks/). > > Though, I think ideas for new developmen tmight better be discussed > once the codebase clears the Incubator. > > -Ted Craig [1] http://struts.apache.org/struts-shale/shale-tiger/apidocs/overview-summary.html
