I have always been of this mindset, since before nice things like the
servlet API or NetDynamics sessions and such (pre-servlet), request is
all you had. My main beef is the rewriting of each field into hidden
fields that are not part of a step within a wizard scenario. For
formbeans of any normal magnitude (say 5 properties), its not a problem.
But then, you usually don't have wizards for forms that small (or at
least large ones). But, for a wizard of say 5 pages, each page has to
rewrite as hidden fields all properties not editable on that page. 

Anyone written or seen an elegant solution to this? 

James

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Graham [mailto:dgraham1980@;hotmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 8:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
> 
> 
> +1 on defaulting to request scope at some point.  It's easier 
> for people 
> +to
> learn even though it is easy to change the default behavior.
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: Unclear semantics on form use for "wizards"
> >Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 21:18:09 -0500
> >
> >The ActionForm is pluggable, and we have always shipped with one 
> >implementation that defaults to session and another that defaults to 
> >request.
> >
> >I believe that originally we used session since that was liable to 
> >cause the least amount of confusion. Then we got into the habit of 
> >using reset to clear everything, which caused all the same confusion 
> >session scope might avoid (where did my values go?).
> >
> >Request might be a better default. Since it is pluggable, we 
> might also 
> >be able to change it sooner than 2.0.x if we wanted.
> >
> >-Ted.
> >
> >
> >11/11/2002 7:05:22 PM, Eddie Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >I remember someone kind of scoffing at us defaulting forms to
> >session
> > >scope -- and adding further that request is really what we should
> >have
> > >gone with.  They further added that this functionality could not
> >be
> > >easily changed, since there were so many Struts apps deployed
> >that
> > >undoubtedly relied on the behavior.
> > >
> > >So ... is this something to slate for 2.0?  :-)  (if we even
> >still
> > >*have* the notion of a form-bean!)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> ><mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
> >For additional commands, e-mail:
> ><mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. 
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:struts-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For 
> additional commands, 
> e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>

Reply via email to