You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by Pete Black <pe...@metering.co.nz> on 2001/02/01 02:01:48 UTC

RE: logic:greaterEqual tag (also logic:iterate with Arrays thread )

Yep, you're right.. i'm still getting my head around the tools Struts
provides.

Thanks for your help

-Pete

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Craig R. McClanahan [SMTP:Craig.McClanahan@eng.sun.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, February 01, 2001 1:32 PM
> To:	struts-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject:	Re: logic:greaterEqual tag (also logic:iterate with Arrays
> thread)
> 
> Pete Black wrote:
> 
> > Does anybody know whether this will be the preferred method of accessing
> > bean methods using logic tags in Struts?
> >
> > It seems a little confusing that you have to know the names of the bean
> you
> > are using when you use logic:xxx tags, but not with html:xxx tags.
> >
> > If it counts for anything, my vote would be to keep the default case in
> all
> > the tags consistent - when there is no name parameter defined, the
> property
> > tag refers to the bean bound to the current action in struts-config.xml.
> It
> > makes things clean and magical like they should be.
> >
> > Is the current behaviour set in stone for version 1?
> >
> 
> Consider a case where the Struts example application uses a conditional
> tag
> outside the scope of an <html:form> tag -- the check for which type of
> transaction is being performed at the top of "registration.jsp" in several
> places, including when creating the <title> element:
> 
>     <logic:equal name="registrationForm" property="action"
>             scope="request" value="Create">
>         <title><bean:message key="registration.title.create"/></title>
>     </logic:equal>
> 
> If the name attribute were not entered here, I don't see how the tag could
> know
> what bean you are referring to.
> 
> It would be feasible to make an assumption that, if you're inside a form,
> then
> you must be talking about the form bean -- although that risks confusion
> as
> well because the tag would behave quite differently depending on where it
> was
> placed.
> 
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > -Pete
> >
> 
> Craig McClanahan
>