问题
Is there any advantage/downfalls between using the inline write tag instead of the resource tag? Example:
<%=Resources.Site.SampleString %>
The resources tag (expression tag) as seen in any MSDN example:
<asp:Literal id="Literal1" runat="server" text="<%$ Resources:Site, SampleString %>" />
I find the first option far easier to use, and it has IntelliSense, but maybe it won't function the same?
回答1:
These methods will function exactly the same. The latter simply calls first one; there is a reason why strongly-typed resources access code is being generated in the background. Therefore you can use whatever method you please.
By the way, there is also another way - by using meta:resourcekey attribute. So you should be able to write:
<asp:Literal id="Literal1" runat="server"
meta:resourcekey="SampleString" text="Default one" />
and it all should work exactly the same.
EDIT on implicit Localization.
What I forgot to mention, is that with meta:resourcekey certain conditions have to be met. The conditions are:
- Values are taken from App_LocalResources, therefore related resource file need to exist
- Related resource file name must be pagename.resx, for example: Default.aspx.resx, Default.aspx.es.resx
- The resource file must contain keys in form of resourcekey.propertyname, for example SampleString.Text, SampleString.ID (although I wouldn't localize control ID's)
- Because of how resources are generated, the key mentioned above must exist in invariant resource file (Default.aspx.resx), or it won't be localized.
回答2:
I realised after some time that the <%=Resources.Site.SampleString %> method does not have designer support (which is understandable). This doesn't bother me, but it is a difference (for future readers).
So if you need or want designer support, the second option would be necessary.
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6017960/globalization-difference-in-inline-tags-in-asp-net