Any simple abtract properties in the page or component that are not otherwise accounted for will be turned into transient page properties. If you want them to be persistent, then you must add the <property> element to the specification.
On 5/10/05, Gregg D Bolinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But if it works without it and you don't care about the persistant strategy, > then I don't need it, right? I mean, it working without it not a bug. > > Gregg > > On 5/10/05, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2005, at 11:58 AM, Gregg D Bolinger wrote: > > > > > In 3.0 we did a property-specification for each property in the > > > Java file > > > and declared a type, etc. The property-specification tag went way, > > > obviously > > > in 4.0. In fact, It would seem that you don't need to do anything > > > similar in > > > 4.0 for it to all work. Is this correct? Should I still be > > > specifying a > > > <property> with a persist attribute for the page? Like I said, it > > > works > > > without it. I am still able to call my abstract getXXXX method and > > > it gives > > > me the appropriate value from a ValidField. > > > > The differences that I know of are that you don't specify a type and > > persist="session" is used instead of the 3.0 "yes" value - this is to > > allow different persistence strategies in the future. > > > > Erik > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
