Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2008/3/17, Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
We can avoid the JS requirement if we make the submit button's submitted
value complex enough to encode the names of the namespace and
actionname.
The problem is that the value of the submit button is what the users sees.
2008/3/17, Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> We can avoid the JS requirement if we make the submit button's submitted
> value complex enough to encode the names of the namespace and
> actionname.
The problem is that the value of the submit button is what the users sees.
You don't want your
Antonio Petrelli wrote:
Sincerely I don't like to put js where it is not necessary.
Agreed, although I'm much less worried about this today than I was 5
years ago.
If you don't know it, Struts 1 has "LookupDispatchAction" that makes
a reverse-lookup in a resource bundle to retrieve the key
Dale Newfield wrote:
Jeromy Evans wrote:
Shouldn't validation just be fixed?
What you really want to say in the s:submit tag is "run this action
instead" what we're currently saying is "run this method instead".
Because of this, you're getting different validation than you want
because cha
Jeromy Evans wrote:
Shouldn't validation just be fixed?
What you really want to say in the s:submit tag is "run this action
instead" what we're currently saying is "run this method instead".
Because of this, you're getting different validation than you want
because changing the method doesn
