--- Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmm..they very well could be exclusive. I put the > slashes in name thing in there to support folks that
> used XML configuration, but wanted to do more > wildcard-type things with it. ...I also plan on using the new REST-ful mapper, so I think I might be out of luck? > Say more about what you don't like about how > namespaces are handled. One thing that just popped up is: - I use tiles. - I *had* a navigation link <s:url action="foo/bar".../> - I *now* have a navigation link <s:url namespace="foo" action="bar".../> - Link renders as "/foo/foo/bar.action" if I'm on "/foo/bar.action" page, which I thought was weird, since if I'm in the namespace already... but I may have outfoxed myself configuration-wise and be in a weird state. So... - I can't just say <s:url action="bar".../>; it's a site-wide nav link - I can't say <s:url action="foo/bar".../> if using code-behind because of the afore-mentioned slash issue - I'd *rather* not say <s:url value="/foo/bar.action".../> um... for purity? But maybe this is the "best" answer. It all started because I wanted to use the @Result(s) annotations (code-behind dependent?) but this may not end well. I guess it's not so much that I don't like the namespaces, it's just that I wanted the best of both worlds, because I'm really lazy. d. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
