Quick note that the name, scope, and type attributes of <html:form> are
deprecated as of 1.1 and, AFAIK, have been removed in the current codebase. So,
if there is a compelling use for them, it would be a good idea to address it
through Bugzilla ASAP.
Quoting Glenn Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Richard,
>
> It seems to me that this would be useful for run-time decisions about where
> to "send" the form data. Perhaps if a low-level user and an admin should see
> the same html form, but the ActionForm that handles the admin's work should
> be different. i.e.:
>
> <c:choose>
> <c:when test="${userIsAdmin}">
> <c:set var="type" value="com.foo.Bar" />
> </c:when>
> <c:otherwise>
> <c:set var="type" value="com.foo.BarSubClass" />
> </c:otherwise>
> </c:choose>
>
> <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="${type}" name="myform"
> />
> <!-- HTML HERE -->
>
> I'm not sure if the html:form can take dynamic params like that (never tried
> it!) Regardless of the syntax, it seems like you could share the same JSP,
> subclass the ActionForm, and save yourself from creating a ton of duplicate
> code. You'd probably still have to add an ActionForm mapping in
> struts-config for each form, but at least you'd have only one JSP and Action
> class. Perhaps changing the scope dynamically like this could potentially
> change the ActionForm stored in the session as well? Did I miss something?
>
> Regards,
> Glenn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Hightower [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 9:11 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: RE: low priority question about html:form
>
>
> Oppsss
>
> the code listig should read:
>
> <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="arcmind.MyForm"
> name="myform"/>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Hightower [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:08 AM
> To: Struts Users Mailing List
> Subject: low priority question about html:form
>
>
>
> I assert the following:
> "You could override the ActionForm associated with this <html:form/> by
> using the scope and type attribute. The scope specifies where to look for
> the ActionForm, and the type specifies what type of ActionForm it is, i.e.,
> the fully qualified Java classname. This technique is not used in practice
> very often, but it is good to know that it exists."
>
> Example,
>
> <html:form action="/myaction" scope="request" type="arcmind.MyForm"/>
>
> I've thought of a few reasons why you want to do this, but they seemed
> fairly lame. Can someone give me a valid use case where you would need this
> feature?
>
> QUESTION: Why not just specify the Form in the action mapping?
>
>
> The <html:form /> tag renders an HTML form. The <html:form/> is associated
> with an action mapping by the action attribute. The action attribute
> specifies the path of the action mapping. Therefore, when the user submits
> the form the action associated with the ActionMapping will be invoked (if
> the form is valid). It is interesting that this tag inspect the
> ActionMapping and finds the ActionForm associated with the ActionMapping.
> If the ActionForm is in scope, the property values of the ActionForm will
> be
> rendered as the values in the HTML form field of the <html:form/>. In fact
> if the ActionMapping has an error (e.g., points to in valid ActionForm),
> the
> page with the <html:form/> will never display until you fix the
> ActionMapping.
--
Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
