[ http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-1376?page=comments#action_37704 ]
Wendy Smoak commented on WW-1376: --------------------------------- See also: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40struts.apache.org/msg23446.html Gabe: Question on this and the overall philosophy that is the goal for Struts 2. Why is it necessary to have a struts dtd rather than simply use the xwork dtd and then simply add the feature that allows the name to be changed from xwork.xml to struts.xml? Is the goal still to keep XWork functionality out of Struts 2 or has it been resolved to create an abstraction layer around XWork so Struts 2 users don't use XWork directly at all? Don: As I understand it, our goal is to shield our users from having to know about XWork, and that would include its DTD. Allowing XWork details to leak through makes it confusing to find documentation, know where to submit tickets, and ask for help. The downside is maintaining the DTD, which is essentially the XWork 1.1 DTD in Struts, however this file is small and shouldn't be a problem. Also, it should be noted that we are still able to recognize and process historical xwork.xml files. > Struts configuration files should be named struts.xml, not xwork.xml > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: WW-1376 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/WW-1376 > Project: Struts 2 > Type: Improvement > Components: Configuration > Reporter: Don Brown > Assignee: Don Brown > Fix For: 2.0.0 > > As part of the renaming and WW cleanup process, I think Struts should have > its own configuration DTD, so users would use it and not the XWork one. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/struts/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
