On 30 Jul 2001 18:20:29 -0700, Tim Colson wrote: > While a custom tag is an option; this bit of functionality would have > required embedding javascript code and html inside the custom tag lib. To > me, putting view specific code like inside a tag library is also a slippery > slope in the quest to keep thing separated. Although I would agree that HTML should probably be best kept outside of a taglib, I don't think JavaScript can be generalized that way. JavaScript can sometimes becomes a heavy development task. This is especially the case with client side validation. I think the same thing that motivates a designer to get their scripts from an archive would probably drive them to use developer tag lib. Also, being that JSP and taglibs, like Velocity, is essentially Java, you can still manage view specific code in a designer friendly way, given some though. Calvin
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity Niall Pemberton
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and veloc... Tim Colson
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and v... Niall Pemberton
- HTML in Taglibs (was: some comparision be... Tim Colson
- Taglibs decrease the separation betw... Greg Maletic
- Re: Taglibs decrease the separat... Bill Clinton
- RE: Taglibs decrease the separat... Greg Maletic
- custom XSL struts taglib (was: R... Jon Brisbin
- Re: custom XSL struts taglib (wa... Calvin Yu
- Re: custom XSL struts taglib (wa... Jon Brisbin
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and v... Calvin Yu
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity Tim Colson
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity devon . bowen
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity Assenza, Chris
- Re: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity Martin Cooper
- RE: some comparision between JSP/struts and velocity Assenza, Chris