> The data storage things declared on a class are "members" or "fields".
> Properties are logical entities, which usually map to object members.
> However a "property" can also be a dynamically computed value.
OK. Makes sense, I guess. The Java Beans specification does mention
this, along with a definition that reads, "Properties are discrete,
named attributes of a Java Bean that can affect its appearance or its
behavior." I hope somewhere it defines what Java Bean attribute is. ;-)
I think the original question (which is now in the distant past...) was,
if you have bean.getME(), is it legal in your JSF page to access it
using #{bean.mE}. Mike Kienenberger said it shouldn't be legal because
of something in the JavaBean spec that I still can't find. My question
is, "Shouldn't it be legal if I have an actual instance variable
declared in my been to be String mE?"
- Brendan
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Kitching [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 4:23 PM
To: MyFaces Discussion
Subject: Re: IF statement..?
CONNER, BRENDAN (SBCSI) wrote:
>> But in the EL, you still use the *property name* not the accessor
> method.
>
> That's not completely true, is it? We have getAbc() and isXyz()
methods
> that have no corresponding property in the class, and we reference
them
> fine using #{myBean.abc} and #{myBean.xyz} notation. So, as far as I
> can see, JSF just mechanically translates myBean.abc to
myBean.getAbc()
> or myBean.isAbc(), depending upon the context.
The data storage things declared on a class are "members" or "fields".
Properties are logical entities, which usually map to object members.
However a "property" can also be a dynamically computed value.
Regards,
Simon
