Yes you are right. If you are doing funky stuff then you will have to worry
about doing the encoding.
This is true in any case. If you are using javascript to build the url then
you can't wrap a resp.encodeURL() around
it anyway.
The point of this approach is to try to get past the annoyance of having to
go through all code, looking for every
URL to wrap an encodeURL()... whether it be in the page, or being generated
elsewhere (servlet, bean, etc).
Dion
ps. I am new to the list... so I apologise if this has been talked about,
but what about the typical caching tag?
Does one exist but I didn't see it? Having a <cache> tag (like occache)
is a very common tag that you
would want right? Also, instead of having sep tags for application,
page, session, how about also just having
a <setAttribute id="foo" scope="page|request|session|application"> a.
la. useBean. The <session> tag would
still be useful if you want to call methods on the session object...
this would purely be there to set/get things
from a given scope
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Bayern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 11:00 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Encoding URLs in a JSP
>
>
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
> > > That's an interesting thought. Most prior discussion I had
> seen focused
> > > on a tag that specifically wraps individual URLs. While what
> you describe
> > > would be much easier for the page author, it also might introduce some
> > > complications (i.e., unexpected conversions).
> > >
> > > +1 for adding it here (to response) and seeing what people think.
> >
> > I'm fine with it, but don't forget to document the fact that it's not
> > foolproof :-). For example, it's unlikely that the tag will understand
> > JavaScript event handlers that compute URLs dynamically.
>
> I agree; it should have a pretty hefty disclaimer. :-)
>
> Shawn
>
