Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Property tag (beating the decomposed horse)

[Maurice Parker]

Patrick Lightbody wrote:

You might not like Anders for the changes he made without asking, but this
this stubbornness is pretty sickening.

Patrick, this is nothing personal. This is a logistical decision.

1) Changing the behavior of the PropertyTag hurts our userbase.
2) Adding addional tags makes the PropertyTag (and the taglibs as a whole) more confusing, not less.

It's not about being stubborn. It's about making decisions based on facts and analysis rather than emotionally charged debate. If you want me to change my position on this matter, you have to convince me that a change is for the greater benifit of the community. As it stands right now, I believe that the proposed change would in fact have the opposite effect.

-Maurice

-Pat

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Re: Property tag (beating the decomposed horse)

It's a different approach I suppose.

I didn't know of the TWO uses of the propertytag, let alone the 3 uses.

I'm not

angry or irritated at anyone because of it, in fact, I was rather

delighted when

I found out the other uses. I'm glad they're documented now. Most of all
however, I like the fact that I was able to use propertytag without

reading any

docs. I like the fact that I was using the valuestack without even

understanding

what it is, or how and why it's working its magic. Maybe adding more tags

will

make that easier, it just doesn't feel that way though based on all the
discussion here.

Quoting Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Agreed. While I'm not a regular WW user these days due to circumstances
beyond my control (and I use Velocity with WW rather that JSP anyway), I
still try to keep abreast of WW's progress. From what I've read of this
debate, one thing is readily apparent. The existing property tag is

*not*

intuitive. To quote an earlier comment from Mike:

"Well, I actually wrote the original two uses of the PropertyTag (which

you

are correct - is in fact 3, would you believe I didn't know about the

third

one? ;))"

Correct me if I'm wrong but I am sure that Mike uses WW extensively, and
has
been doing so for quite some time. If even he didn't know all the
subtleties
of that tag, what chance does a newbie have? Documentation alone isn't

the

best solution - docs plus intuitive design is. Has anyone here ever

tried

to
use all the various permutations of the struts <html:select> tag for
iteration? There is a lot of documentation for that tag, and I've been
using
it for quite some time now. But almost without fail I still have to

either

cut'n'paste existing code, or refer to the documentation to get the damn
thing working each and every time!

I haven't looked at the replacement tags Anders has submitted so I can't
comment on whether those are 'better' or not, but I would encourage
everyone
in this debate to think about what the taglib should look like in a

perfect

world, ie *without regard for what currently exists*. THAT should then
become the goal for XWork 2.0. Obviously backwards compatibility is
crucial,
but deprecation can take care of that if need be.

Chris


"Jason Carreira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:CD44D03584C7A249A3F86891B24EB8EA03FDCAB9@;ehost003.intermedia.net...
Yeah, not like the current ever-so-transparent ww:property tag that
everyone
just understands without any explanation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hani Suleiman [mailto:hani@;formicary.net]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Property tag (beating the decomposed horse)


Excellent! A great way of ensuring nobody is able to use webwork without
first going through lots of docs.






-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork