> Well, i think that people casually refer to it as a "form bean" because it's
> currently named "ActionForm". If the class had been named
> "RequestParametersBean" from the start, i doubt very much that today people
> would be calling it a "form bean". I think it's the word "form" in there
> that's causing so much confusion for newbies (and at least part of the
> reason why there are so many questions that read something like "how can i
> call my action from a link and still have my form bean populated?").
I'll agree with this, that would have made it more clear for me in the
beginning.
I'd like to see 2 changes in the struts-config.xml
1) treat action Classes like ActionForms with a separate definitions
section. I find it odd that I the section to logically name the
ActionForms and have a full class name for the Action.
2) change the parameter names for the action so it like this
<action
path="/stub"
actionclass="StubAction" <-- was type="" now logical name
formbean="StubForm" <-- was name=""
scope="request"
validate="true"
input="/WEB-INF/pages/stub.jsp">
I was confused by the action's name parameter not being the action
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
