Sorry, excuse the formatting on that last message. I hope this is more readable.
-----Original Message----- From: Steve Raeburn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: September 28, 2003 10:46 PM To: Struts Developers List Subject: RE: Standard HTML Tags (was Extending Standard Tags ...) See below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Bubna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: September 28, 2003 8:30 PM > To: Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: Standard HTML Tags (was Extending Standard Tags ...) > > > > Agreed. It's almost unthinkable, but you can even develop an app without > > Struts :-) But I was focussing on JSP which is still the most common view > > technology. At the minute it's not practical to create a JSP Struts app > > without the html taglib so, in my view, Struts as an application framework > > is dependent on that taglib. > > that's ridiculous. i've been working on Struts apps for nearly a > year and i have *never* once used the html taglib. if you wanna > say Struts is "dependent" on it, you've got the funkiest definition > of "dependent" that i've heard in a long while. following that > logic i could say that the internet is dependent on Internet Explorer > because it's the most common means of using it. It's not ridiculous if you actually read what I wrote. I specifically and carefully said, "a JSP Struts app". I know that there are other view technologies but the fact is that JSP *is* the most prevalent and as such I think it is a good and important thing that Struts supports it "out of the box". > > Yup, that's a possible (probable?) way forward. I'm not ignoring other > > view technologies or JSF, just focussing on what is commonly in use now. > > focus is fine. tunnelvision is not. Indeed. I was attempting to explain that my comments are limited to Struts in a JSP context, not that Struts should only support JSP or that other technologies like JSF (or Velocity) should be ignored. I thought the phrase, "I'm not ignoring other view technologies or JSF", explained that. Obviously I was unclear. > > For discussion, here's my view of how things might progress: > > > > - Short term: continue to separate the taglibs from the Struts core into > > their own cvs/build/distribution. > > continue? i didn't know the taglibs had even begun to be moved to a separate > cvs, build, or distribution. and if i'm wrong on this one, i'd love to be > corrected :). You are wrong. David & Rob have been working on reducing the coupling of the tag libraries to the Struts core, introducing TagUtils to take over some of the work that RequestUtils was doing for the tag libaries. The purpose being to reduce the inter-package dependencies allowing the taglibs to be distributed in their own jar with their own release cycle. > > - Medium term: drop support for the old taglibs and move the el > > tags up to the core distribution (or their own distribution if that's what > > is decided). I understand that breaks support for JSP 1.1 and I'm personally > > OK with that but I do appreciate that may not be the general consensus. > > ... > > i don't believe any taglibs or other view technology should be part of the > core distribution. the question of "where" these View libraries > are developed is secondary. i'm definitely with Ted on this one. > develop it wherever there's a community interested in developing it, > but please give the taglibs a separate release cycle. If there's a community outside the Struts project itching to develop and maintain a Struts JSP tag library, please let me know. All I meant was that I would be happy to drop legacy support for the JSP 1.1 taglibs in favour of JSTL and the Struts-EL tags FOR JSP BASED APPLICATIONS. At the moment the el tags are languishing in the contrib directory and I think they should be the primary Struts taglib FOR JSP BASED APPLICATIONS. See above regarding a seperate release cycle. > over in VelocityTools, we've tried hard to dispel this notion that Struts is a > JSP technology. i think we've had a little success with that, but you're not > really helping here. while it's true that other view technologies can use > Struts, as long as the Struts developers treat JSP as the "standard" view and > distribute the two together, i believe you are significantly limiting the > potential of Struts as a framework/controller for applications (web and > otherwise). I believe over at Struts, people have also been doing the same. Right at the top of the Struts home page it says, "For the View, Struts works well with JavaServer Pages, including JSTL and JSF, as well as Velocity Templates, XSLT, and other presentation systems." I also recall several occasions on the struts-user mailing list when Struts committers have corrected the misconception that Struts is in any way bound to JSP. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've said it myself. I don't quite understand why I am not helping. I'm in favour of repackaging the taglibs and giving them a seperate release cycle. I want to reduce the number of Struts specific libraries in favour of the the general purpose and standard JSTL. And I think it's great that users have a choice of view technologies. The only thing I disagree with you about is that I think the Struts taglib is fine where it is and should be included in the distribution whereas you would have us remove it and ship a framework that can't actually do anything. How would you suggest we include example applications without including at least one view technology? And if we're going to bundle support for a view technology, shouldn't it be the most widely used, widely understood and standard (as in JCP, not as in the standard for Struts) one? Steve > > Nathan Bubna > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
