Gary, I like your first thought. <component ....> <symbols> <set name="mySymbol" value="bar"/> <set name="anotherSymbol" value="myBean"/> </symbols> </component> Simply because it mimics <attributes>. I guess being exactly inline with the html counterpart is not that important because attributes is currently "not inline" as in <set-attribute name../>. But I Iike the shared set element evaluated in different contexts. Ryan
On 11/1/05, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Gary, one more thing that would be nice would be if the parser allowed > >symbols and there values to be specified on the component and element xml > >elements. > > > > Would this be a difficult fix? > >For example, > ><component jsfid="foo" extends="baz" mySymbol="bar" allowBody="false"/> > > <element renderId="1" jsfid="myComp" anotherSymbol="myBean"/> > > <element renderId="1" jsfid="myComp" anotherSymbol="anotherBean"/> > ></component> > > > >I noticed that the Builder adds symbols to target ComponentBeans based on > >whether or not the token is a known attribute. > > > >Could the component/element parser do the same; if not jsfid, extends, > id, > >allowBody, facetName, etc then add token as symbol? > > > > We could do this by registering a custom Rule with the digester but I > would rather allow the document to be validated against the DTD. > > > >Right now the dtd stops you. But I think it might be nice to be able to > >push the symbol definitions back to the component/element level in some > >instances. > > > >For example, the above definition overrides the symbol anotherSymbol > inside > >myComp with 2 different values. I couldn't do this at the html level > because > >I would have to commit to 1 value for anotherSymbol. E.g. <span > jsfid="foo" > >mySymbol="bar" anotherSymbol="myBean"/>. > > > >I promise to chill out on the symbols after this! > > I was planning on extending the DTD to handle the symbols. My first > thought was to create a symbols node like the attributes node under the > component and element nodes. This collection would inherit from an extended > parents symbols. > > <component ....> > <symbols> > <set name="mySymbol" value="bar"/> > <set name="anotherSymbol" value="myBean"/> > </symbols> > </component> > > Another design that might be more inline with the html counter-part would > be to create a "set-symbol" node similar to the struts set-property node. > > <component ....> > <set-symbol name="mySymbol" value="bar"/> > <set-symbol name="anotherSymbol" value="myBean"/> > > </component> > > What do you think? Which would be the best to maintain? > > > > Thanks, Ryan > > Gary > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
