On 6 Apr 2002, David M. Karr wrote:
> Date: 06 Apr 2002 20:38:38 -0800
> From: David M. Karr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: anyone care to clarify difference between struts and JSTL?
>
> >>>>> "Craig" == Craig R McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> It would seem reasonable to consider doing what the JSTL implementors did,
> >> which is creating two sets of tag libraries, one using the EL, and one using
> >> scriptlets. As it's logical to assume that the default for the JSTL is the
>EL,
> >> and not RT, for each TLD, they created a "-rt" version and a non-rt version,
> >> which assumes the EL. In the case of Struts, you would probably want the
> >> "default" to be the RT library, and for the "-el" library to be optional. By
> >> making both of these available at the same time, it allows people to fully
> >> experiment with both alternatives. This would only be worthwhile during the
> >> transition. Later releases wouldn't need this.
> >>
>
> Craig> I was actually thinking of a slightly different approach -- for each
> Craig> Struts tag that accepts the name/property/scope triplet of attributes,
> Craig> create a new attribute like "expr" that accepts an expression language
> Craig> expression instead. I believe this will be easier to understand, because
> Craig> the EL expression actually covers all three of these concepts, so it
> Craig> wouldn't really make sense to interpret any of the existing attributes in
> Craig> two different ways.
>
> Craig> Doing this would seem to avoid the need for dual libraries. Does that
> Craig> make sense?
>
> One reason I thought dual libraries would be logical is that the JSTL requires
> JSP 1.2 (correct?). In order for Struts to still allow using JSP 1.1, don't we
> need to have a library available which doesn't use the EL at all?
>
JSTL does indeed require JSP 1.2. That doesn't mean that this is needed
to implement the expression language, however. In fact, I talked with
Shawn Bayern (primary developer on JSTL) and the plan is to separate the
EL implementation into a Commons component that can be reused in several
other places. So, we can include commons-el.jar (or whatever it ends up
getting called) and have EL support in our own tags that is functionally
compatible with the EL in JSTL -- even if you don't actually have JSTL
present in your webapp.
> --
> ===================================================================
> David M. Karr ; Java/J2EE/XML/Unix/C++
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Craig
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
