Aapo, the problem here is that the way it's always been done is to use one .TLD for the tags. Separate namespaces all end up using the same .TLD, so <html:select /> and <ww:select /> are actually equivalent.
It would, however, be trivial (IMHO) to break the .TLD into multiple files much as Sitemesh does, which would allow different *real* namespaces (the "html" and "ww" there) to point to different implementations (which one .TLD does not allow). However, I'd also caution that having "select" in two namespaces is potentially confusing, although legitimate. "ww:select" might be "select a value from the VS" whereas "html:select" might be "construct an HTML select input element," but be aware that the current webwork users will be expecting one apparent namespace instead of two. Just things to think about... --------------------------------------------------------- Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, Aapo Laakkonen wrote: > >> What about 'select'? > > select should be reserved for a ui tag for select controls imho. > > Why's that? Still people seem not to explain why something has to be > done as they intended. I see no problem in using select-tag, if and only > if they reside on separate namespace. I have no problems with > understanding these: > > <db:select ... /> > <html:select ... /> > > etc. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > 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
