>>you could format them yourself, either in the setter (yuck), or in the
action.
Why not in the setter? Sometimes I'll use the setter to populate some
other fields privately that then get used later on in the form. Example: I
get a decimal number representing time off the db. The setter moves left
of the decimal to an hours field and right to a minutes field. Is this a
bad practice?
"Jim Barrows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/24/2004 12:47:04 PM:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 4:38 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: HTML:TEXT tag and Internationalization
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Is there any reasonable argument as to why the html:text tag uses
> > default (value.toString()) formating, while the bean:write uses a
> > formatter that is I18N aware. This is really anoying for locales that
> > normally use comma as a decimal seperator. If you output the
> > value with
> > bean:write it will look OK, but displaying it in an html:text it will
> > use the English dot as a decimal seperator. I think that moving the
> > formatValue from WriteTag into TagUtils, hence making it
> > avaiable to all
> > tags would be a good idea. Then we would have a uniform formatting of
> > values.
>
> Then again, since html:text is usually used with a form bean, which
> is supposed to be all strings, you could format them yourself,
> either in the setter (yuck), or in the action.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
