You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> on 2007/03/13 01:44:43 UTC
"infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
These are some good suggestions.
I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
entirely.
Thoughts / suggestions?
On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
> Project: Tapestry
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: tapestry-core
> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
> Reporter: liigo
> Priority: Trivial
>
>
> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
>
> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or even "t"? (I like "t:request")
>
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
TWD Consulting, Inc.
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
Creator, Apache HiveMind
Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Jesse Kuhnert <jk...@gmail.com>.
Out of the choices given I like core best. Or even not at all.
(meaning if you don't specify anything and your string doesn't match a
service it can also try the default short-hand global binding of
"core" )
On 3/12/07, Pablo Ruggia <pr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Other two:
> "basis"
> "foundation"
> Sorry if the words doesn't fit very well with the intention of the prefix,
> my english it's not excelent.
>
> On 3/12/07, Pablo Ruggia <pr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think "core" is cool. The confusion is possible but with good
> > documentation it's a minor problem.
> > I would discard "t5" because it's linked to the version number (and I hope
> > there will be the 6, 7 ...) and "t" because it's just too abstract.
> > Perhaps "tap" could work.
> >
> > On 3/12/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > These are some good suggestions.
> > >
> > > I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
> > >
> > > I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> > > relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> > > not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> > > entirely.
> > >
> > > Thoughts / suggestions?
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org > wrote:
> > > > shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
> > > > --------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Key: TAPESTRY-1335
> > > > URL:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
> > > > Project: Tapestry
> > > > Issue Type: Improvement
> > > > Components: tapestry-core
> > > > Affects Versions: 5.0.3
> > > > Reporter: liigo
> > > > Priority: Trivial
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
> > > "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than "service:
> > > tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between times when
> > > typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
> > > >
> > > > Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or even
> > > "t"? (I like "t:request")
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > > > -
> > > > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > > TWD Consulting, Inc.
> > > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> > > Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> > > Creator, Apache HiveMind
> > >
> > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> > > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Jesse Kuhnert
Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer
Open source based consulting work centered around
dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Pablo Ruggia <pr...@gmail.com>.
Other two:
"basis"
"foundation"
Sorry if the words doesn't fit very well with the intention of the prefix,
my english it's not excelent.
On 3/12/07, Pablo Ruggia <pr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think "core" is cool. The confusion is possible but with good
> documentation it's a minor problem.
> I would discard "t5" because it's linked to the version number (and I hope
> there will be the 6, 7 ...) and "t" because it's just too abstract.
> Perhaps "tap" could work.
>
> On 3/12/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > These are some good suggestions.
> >
> > I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
> >
> > I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> > relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> > not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> > entirely.
> >
> > Thoughts / suggestions?
> >
> >
> > On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <tapestry-dev@jakarta.apache.org > wrote:
> > > shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
> > > --------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Key: TAPESTRY-1335
> > > URL:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
> > > Project: Tapestry
> > > Issue Type: Improvement
> > > Components: tapestry-core
> > > Affects Versions: 5.0.3
> > > Reporter: liigo
> > > Priority: Trivial
> > >
> > >
> > > the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
> > "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than "service:
> > tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between times when
> > typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
> > >
> > > Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or even
> > "t"? (I like "t:request")
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > > -
> > > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > TWD Consulting, Inc.
> > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> > Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> > Creator, Apache HiveMind
> >
> > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Pablo Ruggia <pr...@gmail.com>.
I think "core" is cool. The confusion is possible but with good
documentation it's a minor problem.
I would discard "t5" because it's linked to the version number (and I hope
there will be the 6, 7 ...) and "t" because it's just too abstract.
Perhaps "tap" could work.
On 3/12/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> These are some good suggestions.
>
> I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>
> I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> entirely.
>
> Thoughts / suggestions?
>
>
> On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
> > shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
> > --------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Key: TAPESTRY-1335
> > URL:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
> > Project: Tapestry
> > Issue Type: Improvement
> > Components: tapestry-core
> > Affects Versions: 5.0.3
> > Reporter: liigo
> > Priority: Trivial
> >
> >
> > the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than "service:
> tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between times when
> typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
> >
> > Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or even
> "t"? (I like "t:request")
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > -
> > You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> TWD Consulting, Inc.
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> Creator, Apache HiveMind
>
> Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Hugo Palma <hu...@gmail.com>.
I don't like that very much because it's too abstract. There are other
prefixes that are tapestry related like "app-property" and
"global-property"(at least in T4) so i think having a prefix called
"tapestry" would cause some confusion.
Martin Strand wrote:
> How about "tapestry"? It's obvious and intuitive.
>
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:33:38 +0100, Hugo Palma
> <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What about "infra" ? It's smaller and shouldn't confuse anyone since
>> it's not that big of a name change.
>>
>> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>>> These are some good suggestions.
>>>
>>> I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>>>
>>> I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
>>> relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
>>> not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
>>> entirely.
>>>
>>> Thoughts / suggestions?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
>>>> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
>>>> URL:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
>>>> Project: Tapestry
>>>> Issue Type: Improvement
>>>> Components: tapestry-core
>>>> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
>>>> Reporter: liigo
>>>> Priority: Trivial
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
>>>> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
>>>> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between
>>>> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find
>>>> it?).
>>>>
>>>> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or
>>>> even "t"? (I like "t:request")
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>>> -
>>>> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Martin Strand <do...@gmail.com>.
How about "tapestry"? It's obvious and intuitive.
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:33:38 +0100, Hugo Palma <hu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> What about "infra" ? It's smaller and shouldn't confuse anyone since
> it's not that big of a name change.
>
> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>> These are some good suggestions.
>>
>> I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>>
>> I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
>> relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
>> not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
>> entirely.
>>
>> Thoughts / suggestions?
>>
>>
>> On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
>>> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
>>> URL:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
>>> Project: Tapestry
>>> Issue Type: Improvement
>>> Components: tapestry-core
>>> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
>>> Reporter: liigo
>>> Priority: Trivial
>>>
>>>
>>> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
>>> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
>>> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between
>>> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find
>>> it?).
>>>
>>> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or
>>> even "t"? (I like "t:request")
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>> -
>>> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>.
What about "tapcore" or "framework"?
Robert
On Mar 14, 2007, at 3/1410:35 AM , Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> Better than Tapestry it's ... Infra Tapestry!
>
> Has a kind of sci-fi feel :-)
>
> I want to get this right, before 5.0.3.
>
> What do people think about "named:" or some variation there? Or
> "alias:"?
>
> On 3/13/07, Hugo Palma <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What about "infra" ? It's smaller and shouldn't confuse anyone since
>> it's not that big of a name change.
>>
>> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>> > These are some good suggestions.
>> >
>> > I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>> >
>> > I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
>> > relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
>> > not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
>> > entirely.
>> >
>> > Thoughts / suggestions?
>> >
>> >
>> > On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
>> >> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
>> >> URL:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
>> >> Project: Tapestry
>> >> Issue Type: Improvement
>> >> Components: tapestry-core
>> >> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
>> >> Reporter: liigo
>> >> Priority: Trivial
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
>> >> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
>> >> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error
>> between
>> >> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you
>> find it?).
>> >>
>> >> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or
>> >> even "t"? (I like "t:request")
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> >> -
>> >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> TWD Consulting, Inc.
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
> Creator, Apache HiveMind
>
> Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Massimo Lusetti <ml...@gmail.com>.
On 3/14/07, Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Better than Tapestry it's ... Infra Tapestry!
>
> Has a kind of sci-fi feel :-)
>
> I want to get this right, before 5.0.3.
>
> What do people think about "named:" or some variation there? Or "alias:"?
"named:" ?! I still prefer "infra".
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Better than Tapestry it's ... Infra Tapestry!
Has a kind of sci-fi feel :-)
I want to get this right, before 5.0.3.
What do people think about "named:" or some variation there? Or "alias:"?
On 3/13/07, Hugo Palma <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about "infra" ? It's smaller and shouldn't confuse anyone since
> it's not that big of a name change.
>
> Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> > These are some good suggestions.
> >
> > I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
> >
> > I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> > relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> > not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> > entirely.
> >
> > Thoughts / suggestions?
> >
> >
> > On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
> >> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
> >> --------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
> >> URL:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
> >> Project: Tapestry
> >> Issue Type: Improvement
> >> Components: tapestry-core
> >> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
> >> Reporter: liigo
> >> Priority: Trivial
> >>
> >>
> >> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
> >> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
> >> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between
> >> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
> >>
> >> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or
> >> even "t"? (I like "t:request")
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> -
> >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
TWD Consulting, Inc.
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator and PMC Chair, Apache Tapestry
Creator, Apache HiveMind
Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work. http://howardlewisship.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by Hugo Palma <hu...@gmail.com>.
What about "infra" ? It's smaller and shouldn't confuse anyone since
it's not that big of a name change.
Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> These are some good suggestions.
>
> I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>
> I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> entirely.
>
> Thoughts / suggestions?
>
>
> On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
>> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
>> --------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
>> URL:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
>> Project: Tapestry
>> Issue Type: Improvement
>> Components: tapestry-core
>> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
>> Reporter: liigo
>> Priority: Trivial
>>
>>
>> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
>> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
>> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between
>> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
>>
>> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or
>> even "t"? (I like "t:request")
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> -
>> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
Re: "infrastructure:" sucks as a name ... but what's better?
Posted by "com.liigo@gmail.com" <co...@gmail.com>.
How about "depot", "center" or "mass"?
we store someting(services etc.) into it, and obtain later.
by liigo
> These are some good suggestions.
>
> I like "core" and "system" better than "infrastructure".
>
> I'm a little nervous about "core" in that it seems to have some
> relationship to tapestry-core or the core component library. It may
> not be obvious that "core:Foo" may come from some other module
> entirely.
>
> Thoughts / suggestions?
>
>
> On 3/9/07, liigo (JIRA) <ta...@jakarta.apache.org> wrote:
>> shorten the name of "infrastructure", or rename it
>> --------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: TAPESTRY-1335
>> URL:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1335
>> Project: Tapestry
>> Issue Type: Improvement
>> Components: tapestry-core
>> Affects Versions: 5.0.3
>> Reporter: liigo
>> Priority: Trivial
>>
>>
>> the name of "infrastructure" is too long. Is the
>> "infrastracture:request" a shorter or easy name than
>> "service:tapestry.request"? and people maybe make typo error between
>> times when typing "infrastructrue"(i just made a typo, do you find it?).
>>
>> Rename "infrastructure" to "system"? "core"? "tapestry"? "t5"? or even
>> "t"? (I like "t:request")
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> -
>> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org