> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Zeigler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] > why not just: > <ol class="${dynamicclass}"> > ... > </ol>
Ooh, spiffy. That would nice. Just today I did an "@Any" just to get 1 dynamic attribute and sighed as I did so. Ignoring the current status quo/"more is less"/there-can-only-be-one argument (which is a fine, valid point) - if I were starting with a clean slate, I'd really like that. The Tapestry Lite evolution from explicit -> implicit would continue to..."even more implicit" components. Er, just "hidden" @Inserts. I dunno, just interesting to think about the move towards less-configuration/less-overhead in Tapestry. I like it. Especially since the heavy-configuration approach is still available if need be/for those who like it. Impressive. > But...to each his own, I guess. =) Yep, unfortunately. Makes things interesting though. :-) - Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
