Howard Lewis Ship wrote: > How about: > > <binding name="displayName">literal:E-mail Address</binding> > <binding name="validators" value="validators:required, email"/> > <binding name="value" value="email"/> > > This is legal in 4.0 as well.
It seems like it might be a bit easier to read. It's still overly verbose and prone to typos. I guess packing two bits of information in a single string just really doesn't sit very well with me. I think it makes the whole thing harder to read. In order to really understand it, I have to find the first ':' and separate the two entities in my head. It's a mental step that really isn't necessary if they were just split out to begin with. Additionally, by explicitly splitting them up there's really no way to screw that mental step up. I just have this sinking feeling that trying to represent two pieces of data in a single unit is going to cause more room for error than if the two were dealt with in isolation. So, I see there being a mental block any time someone needs to read the value, which is going to cost everyone time every time they read it, at the cost of saving the initial writer a few seconds of typing if there were an actual "type" attribute. I also see an increased risk of typos that won't be caught until runtime, which will also lower productivity. Perhaps I'm missing something here? I'm not really sure what we're gaining but I can certainly see what we're losing. I'll admit to not having used Tapestry on any huge in production webapps and my total experience with the framework has only been about a year, so maybe my lack of experience is somehow a roadblock. Also, please don't take this as a crap on all your work. I am generally very pleased with Tapestry 4 and I have nothing but the utmost respect for you folks that are pouring all this energy into making Tapestry a better product. Thanks, Kevin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
