One last comment on this - have a look at the following sites: http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/
http://www.webstandards.org/upgrade/ which present two other sides to the story: 1) by using browser-specific code you actively discriminate against those who have no option but to use something other than NS or IE (e.g. blind people who need a text-based browser). 2) the recent versions of most browsers, including the big 2, support all the relevant standards anyway, so there's simply no need to be browser-specific. That's reality for ya... Regards Colin M Sharples I/T Architect IBM Global Services New Zealand email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 64-4-5769853 mobile: 64-21-402085 fax: 64-4-5765616 Arron Bates <arron@keyboardm To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> onkey.com> cc: Subject: Re: Freetext attribute for all tags... 12/12/2001 11:29 Please respond to "Struts Developers List" It's all reality. Standards and non-compliant realities alike. Take the new DOM scripting model... NS copied IE in the getElementById()... why... because it's truly sweet. But it's not in the spec. It's an example where the spec is not as good as the implementation. W3C are recommendations, and should be treaded as such. I truly feel supporting them only to the limits of their definition is as bad in a "reality" sense as letting everything through flood-gate style (Like an NS4 layer tag. There's a standard for ya :). It's also a chicken and the egg situation. Specs are more of a snapshot of the here, now and has been. Someone has to break the new ground and implement something for the idea to be had and the need created. Like the NS4 layer tag. But, a committer has already said no, so everything else as they say is "pissing in the wind". (It's good to remind people the rules of the system, thanks Ted.) With that, I'm going to get back to my day job. :) Arron. Ted Husted wrote: >Jon Wall wrote: > >>Do you want Struts to be a framework for building just >>mass-market web sites (portals, ecommerce, etc)?? >> > >It's my personal feeling that we are providing the tag extensions as a >convenience, and that they are ancilliary to the actual framework. I >think this will become more evident as other presentation systems, like >Velocity, come to support Struts. > >With the rise of Jakarta Taglibs and the JSPTL, there are fewer and >fewer reasons for us to host our own tag extensions. Something that is >forefront in my mind right now, is that we should continue to stay the >course on the extensions during this transitional period. > >As it stands, any tag you might want to use can easily be created using >bean:write or html:write, and the best thing to do might be for us >(meaning me) to better document those techniques. > >And, as it stands, there is nothing to prevent people from using their >own tag extensions with Struts. I think as team we encourage that idea >whenever we can. If someone wanted to create and maintain their a set of >tag extensions, that supported non-standard attributes, we'd be happy to >link to those from the Resource page. But someone else will have to >accept that burden. > >-- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA. >-- Custom Software ~ Technical Services. >-- Tel +1 716 737-3463 >-- http://www.husted.com/struts/ > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: < mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: < mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
