Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 08.05.2008, 14:02 +0200 schrieb Carsten Ziegeler: > a) should we really support the "flush" information in the jsp?
The flush attribute is really a workaround for non-JSP scriptings. The JSP tags support this attribute out of the box. +1 for not adding. > b) should we really add the bindings as request attributes? This makes > writing jsps easier *if* you don't want to use the taglib. Currently I > would people suggest to use the taglib instead. > However if we want to add the bindings as request attributes, what names > do we use? The interface names or the scripting variable names? > (o.a.s.api.SlingHttpServletRequest vs slingRequest) Rethinking it, I wthink we should not add all SlingBindungs as request attributes. If we place anything in a request attribute it would be the complete SlingBindings object (map). We should then try to enhance the sling:defineObjects tag to support mapping more properties from the SlingBindings object as local variables in the script. The most notable such object would be the SlingScriptHelper, which we should define as a variable of name "sling" as in the other scripting languages. Conversely we might drop support for object mapping from the sling:defineObjects tag. WDYT ? Regards Felix
