> -----Original Message----- > From: James Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 8:17 AM > To: Tag Libraries Users List > Subject: Re: Problem with "empty" key word on a collection. > > > > On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 05:04 PM, Pierre Delisle wrote: > > > The change that Jeff is proposing, although of interest, would > > unfortunately break compatibility with the spec. (sorry > guys, but the > > Expert Group ain't perfect) > > > > Why would extending the empty keyword to support Collections break > compatibility with the spec? >
Modifying the "empty" keyword to support Collections doesn't break anything per se, but it does exceed the definition of "empty" in Section A.3.8 in the JSTL 1.0 specification. I believe that the JSPA talks about adhering to the spec in independent implementations of a JSR. I'm very uninterested in starting a flamewar about JCP, but it is important to note that adhering to the spec allows for portability over multiple implementations of JSTL and EL. I've already submitted a patch to commons-jexl to make "empty" work with Collection, but it won't be of any help to anyone using the current Standard Taglib and JSTL 1.0. I think this is what the nascent Unstandard Taglib what meant for, providing functionality for little bits of functionality that might have been inadvertently overlooked by the first rev of JSTL in a way that doesn't conflict with existing JCP specs. -------- Tim O'Brien > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
