These all sound like good ideas to me. We still need to decide which 
refactoring we're going to use, if either. I think both work equally well 
and provide major improvements to the library. I don't think Fabrizio or I 
can make this decision. Obviously we both like our own implementation. I 
think there is only a few differences between them. Both provide backward 
compatability as well as including new features. Some of the features are 
good and some I'm not sure we want to make public just yet. 

I don't think 
we want to support ANY expression language support at this time. Fabrizios 
implentation is nice, but not standard by any means. I don't think I'd 
like to be forced to support that in the future, especially once the next 
JSP spec is finished and expression language is automatically included and 
standard.

Also, I think that the architecture of this needs to follow the 
Model-View-Controller fairly closely. Both implementations do expect that 
Fabrizios doesn't include a seperated 'HtmlView' from the rest. I think 
this is absolutely necessary and will allow an option for completly 
customizable HTML with some special View object.

I've been planning on doing more of a comparison between the two 
refactorings, but I just haven't had the time lately.

Other thoughts on this topic?

Oh by the way, I have a start to a decorator taglib, that I should be able 
to make available if we want it...which is an interface! I'm sure Ben 
would like that! It also provides a simple factory mechanism to support 
the creation of the decorators, which I suppose could be either an 
explicit class name, or a pre-defined code that describes a given 
decorator.



On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Benjamin Simpson wrote:

> I have looked at the refactorings.  I also attended JavaOne again last month
> and have begun to feel a paradigm shift.  Companies will use open source
> provided the license is right and there is active participation of a
> significant developer and user base.
> 
> 1)  We have to be adding value to what JSTL does but maintain the user base
> we currently have by remaining backward compatible.
> 
> 2)  We should take the main tree, release another bug fix version and begin
> to add enhancements gleaned from the refactorings that John and Fabrizio
> have added.
> 
> 2.1)  We should add the decorator tag that John just mentioned.
> 2.2)  We should inject interfaces where possible to permit the library to be
> extended.
> 2.3)   I would enjoy seeing a built in display:search tag that permits
> searching the table display.
> 
> 3)  Test harness and junit code.
> 
> 4)  We should set some timelines and assign tasks to the committing
> developers on this list.
> 
> I am in list mode today and would really like to see this project succeed.
> Is this helping?
> 
> Ben
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
> With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine.
> WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines at the
> same time. Free trial click here: http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/345/0
> _______________________________________________
> displaytag-devel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/displaytag-devel
> 

-- 
John York
Software Engineer
CareerSite Corporation



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: VM Ware
With VMware you can run multiple operating systems on a single machine.
WITHOUT REBOOTING! Mix Linux / Windows / Novell virtual machines at the
same time. Free trial click here: http://www.vmware.com/wl/offer/345/0
_______________________________________________
displaytag-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/displaytag-devel

Reply via email to