struts-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ken Riley" <>
Subject Suggested Change in ActionForwards
Date Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:23:52 GMT
Hi all,

Recently I've had a good deal of trouble with templates after upgrading my
servlet container. It seems my container vendor has revisited their 
interpretation of forwards in the JSP spec which broke my application 
horribly.  Several people on this list ( thanks Cedric and others ) gave me
good suggestions about how to get my app up and going again. Unfortunately, 
my servlet container made it very difficult for any quick-fix solution 
that I tried. The solution that finally solved my problem involved adding
a new 'feature' to the ActionForward and a slight addition to 
the struts-config.dtd. I wanted to share the idea with the group to see 
if these additions might be helpful to the rest of the community.

What I've done is add an include parameter for the <forward> tag in the 
struts-config.xml file. This tells the ActionServlet (I'm currently working 
with 1.02) to do an include instead of a forward after processing the 
action. This is similar to the redirect parameter that already exists.
What this allows me to do is explicitly declare that the target
of the <forward> is in fact not a complete page but is a fragment meant
to be included in a template (or tile). This also allows me to have each
element of the template (or tile) be an action.

The TilesRequestProcessor currently will do an include instead of a forward
if the request.isCommitted() is true. This is nice (except it doesn't work
with my #@%& servlet container) but I would like to be able to explicitly
declare this behavior in the base struts package so that the developer has
control of the way forwards operate.

So, a forward that needs to be an include looks like
<forward name="success" path="/jsp/myPage.jsp" include="true"/>
where include is an optional parameter that defaults to false.

I've made the few code changes in my local version of 1.02. I would be willing
to submit the changes to the current tree if the powers that be think that 
this would be good for the package.

Thanks for any feedback or <ul>constructive</ul> criticism :).


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message