> Ok, this issue breaks down like this in my mind: > 1. Should our tags (url, form, etc) have attributes > for the > amespace, action, and method, or just have one for > the url? > 2. Should our default ActionMapper allow the method > to be specified in the url? > Issue #1 goes back to the more fundamental issue of > whether Struts 2 > is a _web_ framework that treats URLs as king or a > more general app > framework that hides the URL from the developer. > Personally, I think > truts 2 should be centered around the concept of the > URL and not be > hidden. Even in the case of portlets, the concept of > a identifying > string for the controller is important. If you want > the framework > hide the HTTP and HTML from you, JSF or Wicket might > be a better > framework than Struts. >
I disagree here because the URL mapping is more likely to change than the namespace / actionName mapping. Consider if you leave the namespace empty and just give an action name, it will assume the same namespace. Now if you change the namespace for a package of actions, that link still works, but the hardcoded URL one doesn't. Plus, if people are going to be switching to a more RESTful action mapping, URL links will all break, but namespace / actionName links won't. Jason --------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted via Jive Forums http://forums.opensymphony.com/thread.jspa?threadID=40932&messageID=82232#82232 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
