It's christmas in july! I just passed the longest 15 mins ever
downloading the svn source (note to self: always keep the source on
hand somewhere..), ran mvn install, and finally got to try my app. I
got it running and it WORKED!! I clicked a button, initialization
logic from a component that wasn't really there loaded and boom: it
worked! Fantastic work, Jesse! Really nicely done.
People should be happy to finally have a working parent/child
IComponent heirachy to play with at least :)
What does that mean? Don't tease me!
Actually, what _does_ that mean..? Nested components aren't
something I've found particularly intuitive in tapestry (above and
beyond storing the current id of a parent component in a named
location in the request params so child components can get to it from
there..), so i'm not sure about the IComponent hierarchy to begin
with, let alone what was wrong with it. But, having experience in
other component frameworks, the word "hierarchy" definitely got my
attention! Please, do elaborate...
Thanks again,
Josh
On 7/31/06, Jesse Kuhnert (JIRA) <[email protected]> wrote:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1031?page=comments#action_12424574
]
Jesse Kuhnert commented on TAPESTRY-1031:
-----------------------------------------
I have it fixed and working now Josh, just can't commit the changes quite yet.
You exposed the need for a much more extensive change than I had anticipated (a
good change though).
Once I get done adjusting/adding more unit tests to be sure I'm not screwing
everything up I'll commit and update this ticket.
People should be happy to finally have a working parent/child IComponent
heirachy to play with at least :)
> theres no javascript lifecycle for components rendered using the ajax rewind.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAPESTRY-1031
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPESTRY-1031
> Project: Tapestry
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 4.1
> Environment: windows xp, maven 2, tapestry 4.1 snapshots, 2gb ram,
ie/firefox
> Reporter: Joshua Long
> Assigned To: Jesse Kuhnert
>
> I might be missing something, but..
> A component gets a guarantee of proper initialization because the javascript
(typically employed through the Script component) gets a chance to intialize in the
<initialization> block of a .script file for a standard request/response cycle,
ie, window.onload.
> Making use of the EventListener annotation reveals a new problem: components
rendered for the first time during the render cycle from an ajax request dont get
that same guarantee, whcih effectively makes a lot of components non ajax freindly
(think javascript heavy components like fck editor or even tapestry's pallette
component) by default even if they dont need to be.
> Suggested remedies are:
> 1. extend the initialization block to all components even if theyre rendered
dynamically. if youve contributed code to the initialization block of a script
file then it should be invoked for any component rendered in an ajax request.
This approach might break code that for some reason or another does things which
can only work during onload and not afterwards. I cant imagine such a situation..
if youre setting properties on newly created objects or connecting even listeners
or even adding nodes to something that should all be equally applicable to objects
created before onload as objects created after a tags innerHTML has been updated
through AJAX.
> 2. if however the above approach might theoretically break existing components, an even
simpler solution (a pain in the arse, and it would render any useful components a company
might have non -useful for ajax until its updated...), but sitll definitely doable is to
modify te .script file and its DTD to honor a new section (something like
<ajax-initialization> </ajax-initialization>)
> I prefer the first approach as it would transparently make all components and their
embedded .script files useful in an ajax context. The second approach would be OK I suppose,
but would fragment the component "market" needlessly into an even bigger schizm:
tap3, tap4, tap4 + ajax.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
