Yes, I would have to agree. Most HTML coders also have to deal with
JavaScript, which uses the traditional dot notation. The colon
introduces something completely new to most developers.
IMHO JavaSofts noble intentions with this syntax have missed the mark.
I hope they realise this and at least allow both in the v1
implementation, with a view to deprecating the colon in a future
release. Still, it's not the end of the world if they don't.....
Regards
Drew Cox
Barrack Consulting.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kirkdorffer, Daniel [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, 23 April 1999 1:56
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: <DISPLAY> syntax (WAS: Accessing "internal" beans)
>
> <rant>
>
> This reminds me, I've never liked this new syntax for the DISPLAY tag
>
> <DISPLAY PROPERTY="[beanname:+]property"
> PLACEHOLDER="substitutevalue">
>
> What I don't like is the use of colons (:) rather than periods (.).
> The
> spec says it "helps distinguish this naming convention from Java
> syntax." I
> don't see why that is necessary. For consistency sake using periods
> would
> be more intuitive to a Java developer and make no difference to an
> HTML
> developer. These are "Java" Server Pages after all. This looks more
> like
> C++ Server Pages.
>
> </rant>
>
> Dan
>
> > ----------
> > From: h wulfson[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Reply To: h wulfson
> > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 12:02 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Accessing "internal" beans
> >
> > How about <DISPLAY property=login:user:name>
> > At least, that's .92 syntax. I don't know
> > .91 syntax.
> >
> > -Harris
> >
> >
> > --- Doug Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > After experimenting a little with JSP, I think it
> > > is
> > > > possible to use Model 1 with good results by using
> > > > only one bean per JSP page. This bean makes
> > > references
> > > > to other more general data entity beans.
> > >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > I actually use this approach. The "Login" session
> > > bean acts as a
> > > class factory for all other classes used. So, it has
> > > methods
> > > such as getUser(), etc., to get the other "beans."
> > >
> > > These are indeed Beans in all respects except that
> > > the constructor
> > > has only one instantiation: Constructor(Login) - to
> > > enforce login
> > > privlidges.
> > >
> > > I would like to have a JSP <BEAN> set of tags which
> > > says:
> > >
> > > <BEAN TYPE="net.company.User" NAME="user"
> > > SOURCE="login.getUser()">
> > >
> > > So that the later <DISPLAY...> type tags can use it
> > > as a bean.
> > >
> > > Right now, I'm stuck with
> > >
> > > <% net.company.User user = login.getUser(); %>
> > >
> > > And lots of
> > >
> > > <%= user.getName() %>
> > >
> > > type tags...
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Doug
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> ======================================================================
> ====
> > =
> > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in
> the
> > body
> > of the message "signoff JSP-INTEREST". For general help, send email
> to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
> >
>
> ======================================================================
> =====
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
> body
> of the message "signoff JSP-INTEREST". For general help, send email
> to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JSP-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
