Hi, I think accessing the static values of the class of the actual object would be fine (well-defined, clear, intuitive). But I agree it departs from the "objects with properties" model.
In any case, a mechanism for defining (and/or accessing) named constants would be nice. Thanks for the quick response! Regards, Boris Shawn Bayern wrote: >Yeah, the topic has come up. It could be done in principle, but > > - it won't make it into JSTL 1.0 > > - there are problems with referring to static members of a class > The JSTL EL just refers to objects, so it's not clear which class in > the object's ancestry hierarchy the static values would come from. > We'd probably need to add a mechanism to refer to a class specifically, > and this would complicate a language that's intended to hide the > details of Java data types for page authors. > >Hope that helps, > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
