I'm able to fix this problem using 'top'
 
Thanks,
Sharath.

--- On Wed, 6/25/08, sharath karnati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: sharath karnati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: weird problem <s:iterator> tag.
To: "Paweł Wielgus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, user@struts.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 6:05 PM

The deploymentVersion is from 'action'. I even tried with <c:if>
and it is also having same issue.
 
Thanks,
Sharath.

--- On Wed, 6/25/08, Paweł Wielgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: Paweł Wielgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: weird problem <s:iterator> tag.
To: "Struts Users Mailing List" <user@struts.apache.org>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 5:38 PM

Hi Sarath,
where from this deploymentVersion is from (action, session)?
Such construction works for me in many places, so i would like to
replicate this problem.

Best greetings,
Paweł Wielgus.


2008/6/25 sharath karnati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi All,
>
>     In .jsp file, I'm having following code which is using
<s:iterator> tag.
>
>    <s:iterator value="userCommentsList"
id="usercomment">
>  <tr>
>   <td align="center"> <s:property
value="#usercomment.projectNm" /> </td>
>   <td align="center"> <s:property
value="#usercomment.subject" /> </td>
>   <td align="center"> <s:property
value="#usercomment.comments" /> </td>
>
>   <s:if test="%{deploymentVersion !='All'}">
>    <td align="center"> <s:date
name="#usercomment.closingDate" format="MM/dd/yyyy" />
</td>
>   </s:if>
>  </tr>
>  </s:iterator>
>
>    The <s:iterator> tag is showing properties values(projectNm,
subject,comments)correctly. 'deploymentVersion' property is not a
member of  'usercomment' and when it is having value 'All'
still it is displaying '#usercomment.closingDate' value. I think that
it is not validating <s:if> condition correctly inside
<s:iterator>. If I move this condition outside of <s:iterator> it
is working as expected.
>
>    Please let me know, how to validate the properties which are not member
of <s:iterator> value.
>
> Thanks,Sharath.
>
>
>
>


      

Reply via email to