Re: Sitemesh buffering undecorated content
Chris Miller <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.sitemesh.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Mathias Bogaert wrote: > Indeed, decorators.xml is specific to ConfigDecoratorMapper. How about > supporting it in both? I'm not sure decorators.xml even needs exclude support (although admittedly it might be convenient in some situations). Thing is, it's possible to map url's to a non-existent decorator in decorators.xml already. This has a net result of that URL not being decorated (unless one of the other decorators in the chain catches it - which would still happen with explicit exclude support in decorators.xml anyway). And it doesn't address the buffering problem. As Mike pointed out, adding an extra filter means that web.xml is entirely responsible for controling what does and doesn't make it to Sitemesh for decoration. I'm still in two minds as to whether another filter is a good idea or not (vs sitemesh.xml configuration). But maybe that's just because of the pain I've been through with filters over the past year or so! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: SourceForge.net Broadband Sign-up now for SourceForge Broadband and get the fastest 6.0/768 connection for only $19.95/mo for the first 3 months! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=2562&alloc_id=6184&op=click