hi Jim!
but i think most of the time when there needs to be a replacement
value, that value is in the form of a noun (at least that's how my
messages are). so given a message with replacement placeholders,
wouldn't the only issue be the placement (position) of these
placeholders within the context of the localized message?
if the replacement values are for other things that are not nouns then
it would be much harder to object-orientify (new word!) messages.
but i also see your point. just having one unique message for each
unique situation is simple and does the job. the only negative thing
is that it takes up more memory when the message bundle is cached in
application scope since there will be a lot of duplication in the
bundle.
i was hoping i could clean things up. for example, instead of this:
error.invalid.first.name=Invalid first name
error.invalid.last.name=Invalid last name
error.invalid.middle.name=Invalid middle name
error.invalid.address=Invalid address
error.invalid.zip.code=Invalid zip code
i could get this:
error.generic.invalid=Invalid {0}
first.name=first name
last.name=last name
middle.name=middle name
address=address
zip.code=zip code
and hoping i could do something like this:
new ActionMessage("error.generic.invalid", "first.name");
doesn't it seem odd that ActionMessage doesn't already have the ability
to use other keys as replacement values... i can't think of any reason
for this other than it was simply forgotten
"Somebody set up us the bomb! All your base are belong to us!" now
that would be a major translation problem. no argument here. :D
woodchuck
--- Jim Barrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Woodchuck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 8:23 AM
> > To: struts
> > Subject: ActionMessage replacement "keys" ?
> >
> >
> > hihi all,
> >
> > is everyone rolling their own helper function to use other
> > message keys
> > as replacement values when creating ActionMessage or ActionError
> > objects?
> >
> > i'm wondering if there's a better way to do this other than
> > getting the
> > MessageResources object and calling the getMessage() function then
> > putting the results into an object array and then passing this to
> the
> > ActionMessage constructor...
> >
> > can/will this functionality be added to the ActionMessage
> > object in the
> > future?
>
> If you're talking about building a message using other keys, no. I
> generally find that I am better off using a seperate key for such
> situations. The problem I run usually into is one of syntax,
> especially with other languages. Breaking things up like that can
> make it harder to structure a well formed sentence. Since one of my
> pet peeves is messages that are not grammatically correct, I avoid
> this at all costs.
>
> Consider an English message translated into say German. IIRC there
> is a joke about a German teacher who ends every class with 5 minutes
> of verbs. Apparently German verb structure is different then
> English, so how would fit that structure into your messages? Or
> Navajo, which is completely different from any other language?
>
> Such flexibitlity in your messages might be nice from a programming
> standpoint, but could be a major pain when translating into foreign
> languages.
>
> So, my answer to your question is that I don't use message resource
> keys as arguments to my messages. In such cases I just use a
> different message key for each possibilty.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
