date:20081204

I would just create a model that wraps the property model and does the
conversion.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:12 AM, pixologe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Hi everybody,

 I wonder if there is an elegant way to feed a ListMultipleChoice component
 with a comma separated string (using a PropertyModel)

 e.g. with the following property to be accessed by PropertyModel:

 public String getMySelectedOptions() {
 return optionA,optionC;
 }


 ...something like this:

 ListString allOptions = Arrays.asList(new
 String[]{optionA,optionB,optionC,optionD});
 new CheckBoxMultipleChoice(genreChoice, new PropertyModel(getModel(),
 mySelectedOptions)), allOptions);

 Of course this does not work. But is there a elegant solution to make it
 work? I am thinking of something acting similar to a converter for text
 input fields, just the other way round :)

 Thanks for any inspiration
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/How-to-feed-ListMultipleChoice-with-comma-separated-String-via-PropertyModel%29-tp20834160p20834160.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How to feed ListMultipleChoice with comma separated String via PropertyModel)

2008-12-04 Thread pixologe


Thanks for the reply...
that's exactly what I just tried, until I realized that this will not work
for writing the selected options back to the my domain object... at least I
think so:
I can teach the model to accept either String and List in setObject, however
there's no way of letting it return different types in getObject, depending
on the requestor...
Or am I just completely on the wrong track and missing something quite
obvious? Probably ;-)


jwcarman wrote:
 
 I would just create a model that wraps the property model and does the
 conversion.
 
 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:12 AM, pixologe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

 Hi everybody,

 I wonder if there is an elegant way to feed a ListMultipleChoice
 component
 with a comma separated string (using a PropertyModel)

 e.g. with the following property to be accessed by PropertyModel:

 public String getMySelectedOptions() {
 return optionA,optionC;
 }


 ...something like this:

 ListString allOptions = Arrays.asList(new
 String[]{optionA,optionB,optionC,optionD});
 new CheckBoxMultipleChoice(genreChoice, new PropertyModel(getModel(),
 mySelectedOptions)), allOptions);

 Of course this does not work. But is there a elegant solution to make it
 work? I am thinking of something acting similar to a converter for text
 input fields, just the other way round :)

 Thanks for any inspiration
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/How-to-feed-ListMultipleChoice-with-comma-separated-String-via-PropertyModel%29-tp20834160p20834160.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 
 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/How-to-feed-ListMultipleChoice-with-comma-separated-String-via-PropertyModel%29-tp20834160p20835144.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How to feed ListMultipleChoice with comma separated String via PropertyModel)

How about something like this:
public class CommaSeparatedToStringListModel implements IModelListString
{
private final IModelString csvModel;

public CommaSeparatedToStringListModel(final IModelString csvModel)
{
this.csvModel = csvModel;
}

public ListString getObject()
{
return new
ArrayListString(Arrays.asList(csvModel.getObject().split(,)));
}

public void setObject(final ListString strings)
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
for (String string : strings)
{
if(builder.length()  0)
{
builder.append(,);
}
builder.append(string);
}
csvModel.setObject(builder.toString());
}

public void detach()
{
csvModel.detach();
}
}

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:00 AM, pixologe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Thanks for the reply...
 that's exactly what I just tried, until I realized that this will not work
 for writing the selected options back to the my domain object... at least I
 think so:
 I can teach the model to accept either String and List in setObject,
 however
 there's no way of letting it return different types in getObject, depending
 on the requestor...
 Or am I just completely on the wrong track and missing something quite
 obvious? Probably ;-)


 jwcarman wrote:
 
  I would just create a model that wraps the property model and does the
  conversion.
 
  On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:12 AM, pixologe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
 
 
  Hi everybody,
 
  I wonder if there is an elegant way to feed a ListMultipleChoice
  component
  with a comma separated string (using a PropertyModel)
 
  e.g. with the following property to be accessed by PropertyModel:
 
  public String getMySelectedOptions() {
  return optionA,optionC;
  }
 
 
  ...something like this:
 
  ListString allOptions = Arrays.asList(new
  String[]{optionA,optionB,optionC,optionD});
  new CheckBoxMultipleChoice(genreChoice, new PropertyModel(getModel(),
  mySelectedOptions)), allOptions);
 
  Of course this does not work. But is there a elegant solution to make it
  work? I am thinking of something acting similar to a converter for text
  input fields, just the other way round :)
 
  Thanks for any inspiration
  --
  View this message in context:
 
 http://www.nabble.com/How-to-feed-ListMultipleChoice-with-comma-separated-String-via-PropertyModel%29-tp20834160p20834160.html
  Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 

 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/How-to-feed-ListMultipleChoice-with-comma-separated-String-via-PropertyModel%29-tp20834160p20835144.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: IChainingModel

2008-12-04 Thread jWeekend


John,

Well spotted. AbstractPropertyModel implements IChainingModel but breaks its
contract :
 * Models that implement this interface will support chaining of IModels.
getObject() of a
 * IChainingModel should do something like:
 * 
 * pre
 * if ( object instanceof IModel) { return ((IModel)object).getObject()}
 * else return object;
 * /pre

Its getObject() implementation does not abide by this.
/**
 * @see org.apache.wicket.model.IModel#getObject()
 */
public Object getObject()
{
final String expression = propertyExpression();
if (Strings.isEmpty(expression))
{
// Return a meaningful value for an empty property 
expression
return getTarget();
}

final Object target = getTarget();
if (target != null)
{
return PropertyResolver.getValue(expression, target);
}
return null;
}

Regards - Cemal
http://www.jWeekend.co.uk http://jWeekend.co.uk 



John Patterson wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 I'm messing about with nested models and see the IChainingModel interface
 which is implemented by the PropertyModels but its methods never actually
 seems to be used.
 
 So I'm just checking that I haven't missed anything... for nested models I
 don't actually need to implement this right?
 
 This is its def:
 
 
 public interface IChainingModelT extends IModelT
 {
   /**
* Sets the model that is chained inside this model.
* 
* @param model
*/
   public void setChainedModel(IModel ?  model);
 
   /**
* Returns the chained model if there is a chained model.
* 
* @return The chained model
*/
   public IModel ?  getChainedModel();
 
 }
 
 Thanks,
 
 John
 
 
 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/IChainingModel-tp20835085p20835745.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Clearing Cache after Logout

2008-12-04 Thread vishy_sb


Thanks for the reply there Nino. I have set up a custom expired page and have
set the following in Application class 
getApplicationSettings().setPageExpiredErrorPage(PageExpired.class);

Now the page expired is set to this page. But still on hitting the back
button I get back to the page. I tried  using the
SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy in my Application.init() method. The code
that put in there looks something like this

SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy authorizationStrategy = new
SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy(
LimitManagerPage.class, PageExpired.class)
{
protected boolean isAuthorized() {
// Authorize access based on user 
authentication in the session
if(((WebSession) 
Session.get()).isSessionInvalidated()){
return false;
} else {
return true;
}
}
};
 
getSecuritySettings().setAuthorizationStrategy(authorizationStrategy);

But this doesn't provide the desired result as well. This doesn't even show
my custom PageExpired web page. Any ideas about why this is not working or
something else that I can do to get this to work.

Thanks in advance,
vishy


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Clearing-Cache-after-Logout-tp20823965p20837005.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Clearing Cache after Logout

2008-12-04 Thread Serkan Camurcuoglu

you can set your application's home page as your expired page or throw a 
restartresponseexception (to home page) from the constructor of your 
page expired page.. at least I do it that way..



vishy_sb wrote:

Thanks for the reply there Nino. I have set up a custom expired page and have
set the following in Application class 
getApplicationSettings().setPageExpiredErrorPage(PageExpired.class);


Now the page expired is set to this page. But still on hitting the back
button I get back to the page. I tried  using the
SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy in my Application.init() method. The code
that put in there looks something like this

SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy authorizationStrategy = new
SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy(
LimitManagerPage.class, PageExpired.class)
{
protected boolean isAuthorized() {
// Authorize access based on user 
authentication in the session
if(((WebSession) 
Session.get()).isSessionInvalidated()){
return false;
} else {
return true;
}
}
};
 
 	getSecuritySettings().setAuthorizationStrategy(authorizationStrategy);


But this doesn't provide the desired result as well. This doesn't even show
my custom PageExpired web page. Any ideas about why this is not working or
something else that I can do to get this to work.

Thanks in advance,
vishy


  



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Wicket integration with good charts api

2008-12-04 Thread PY


Really interested by a Wiki page too.

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-integration-with-good-charts-api-tp20322515p20837861.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Clearing Cache after Logout

2008-12-04 Thread Pointbreak

That you get back to your last page when hitting the back button has
nothing to do with Wicket. It's just what browsers do when you hit the
back button. I guess you are using firefox (3), and firefox 3 will show
a page from its in-memory cache, even if the page headers tell it the
page is expired long ago, must be reloaded, and must be revalidated
(which is what wicket tells it by default). Google on firefox cache
reload or something for how firefox caches pages and for suggestions on
how to force a page reload.

On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:35:09 +0200, Serkan Camurcuoglu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 you can set your application's home page as your expired page or throw a 
 restartresponseexception (to home page) from the constructor of your 
 page expired page.. at least I do it that way..
 
 
 vishy_sb wrote:
  Thanks for the reply there Nino. I have set up a custom expired page and 
  have
  set the following in Application class 
  getApplicationSettings().setPageExpiredErrorPage(PageExpired.class);
 
  Now the page expired is set to this page. But still on hitting the back
  button I get back to the page. I tried  using the
  SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy in my Application.init() method. The code
  that put in there looks something like this
 
  SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy authorizationStrategy = new
  SimplePageAuthorizationStrategy(
  LimitManagerPage.class, PageExpired.class)
  {
  protected boolean isAuthorized() {
  // Authorize access based on user 
  authentication in the session
  if(((WebSession) 
  Session.get()).isSessionInvalidated()){
  return false;
  } else {
  return true;
  }
  }
  };
   
  getSecuritySettings().setAuthorizationStrategy(authorizationStrategy);
 
  But this doesn't provide the desired result as well. This doesn't even show
  my custom PageExpired web page. Any ideas about why this is not working or
  something else that I can do to get this to work.
 
  Thanks in advance,
  vishy
 
 

 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: setResponsePage + anchor

2008-12-04 Thread Cserep Janos

I'm doing it like this from my Page:

 @Override
public void renderHead(IHeaderResponse response) {

if (anchor != null) {

response.renderOnLoadJavascript(location.href='# + anchor + ';);
anchor = null;
}
}

Just have a setter for the anchor property on the Page instance you
pass to setResponsePage().

janos


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Charlie Dobbie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi,

 I know you can set an anchor when you are coming from a Link component, but
 how can I set an anchor without the Link?

 From a Button's onSubmit, I am calling setResponsePage with a Page instance,
 and have a reference to a component on that page that I would like the
 browser to jump directly to.  From my research so far, I don't believe this
 to be possible, but easily could have missed something!

 Is there a way to do this?

 Regards,
 Charlie.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

login using AuthenticatedWebApplication

2008-12-04 Thread miro


I am using   AuthenticatedWebApplication , the example documents how to
control access to pages with roles  using annotations  ,but In my case   i
have some users  without any role , can I prevent access to my aplication
for these users ?
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/login--using-AuthenticatedWebApplication-tp20840439p20840439.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Openid integration?

2008-12-04 Thread Olger Warnier


Hi Nino,

It is possibile to integrate spring security with the wicket swarm/ 
wasp software.
This gives you freedom to attach any kind of authentication mechanism,  
including openid.

We use the integration for a LDAP based integration.

If you like, I have a sample on how to deal with this somewhere.

Kind Regards,

Olger


On 3 dec 2008, at 07:31, Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:


Hmm, i'll dig into it.. Thanks..

Jan Kriesten wrote:

Hi Nino,


I have something working only partially though, cant get email and  
name
attribute back from the openid provider properly.. Seems to work  
with

openid.org, but not claimid.com or myopenid.com



why not using spring-security and don't have any more hassle at all?

Best regards, --- Jan.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
-Wicket for love

Nino Martinez Wael
Java Specialist @ Jayway DK
http://www.jayway.dk
+45 2936 7684


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

2008-12-04 Thread miro


I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication annotation)
in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

/**
 * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
 * 
 * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length array by
default
 */
String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {

LIASION_OFFICER,
GRANTS_OFFICER,
PROGRAM_ANALYST,
ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example 

@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error 

The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be a
constant expression  .please help me resolve this .
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/using--annotation-%40AuthorizeInstantiation-tp20841729p20841729.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior problem with HttpSessionStore

2008-12-04 Thread Mikko Pukki

Hi everybody,

Recently we discovered that SecondLevelCacheSessionStore was giving us a huge
performance hit in some of our applications, so we decided to the old
HttpSessionStore. Performance increase was significant and the impact on memory
usage was relatively small, so we decided to stick with it.

But we also discovered a problem when using AjaxSelfUpdatingbehavior combined
with ajax buttons (when ajax button forwards to another page (let's call is
PageB) by

setResponsePage method).
When a user hits a button and immediately after that an ajax request is fired
by the
AjaxSelfUpdatingbehavior, AccessStackPageMap thinks that user has pressed back
button.

This is what happens when this behavior occurs:

1) User pressed an ajax button

2) AjaxSelUpdatingBehavior fires another ajax request right after user pressed
button

3) User ends up on PageB

4) now pressing ajax buttons on a new page has no effect

WebRequestCycleProcessor's resolve method goes now to line 114:

if (pageId != access.getId())
{
// the page is no longer the active page
// - ignore this request
processRequest = false;
}

Wicket Ajax Debug prints something like this:

INFO: Initiating Ajax POST request on ?
wicket:interface=:1:inputForm:back::IActivePageBehaviorListener:0:wicket:ignoreIfNotActive=truerandom=0.6741350924814413
INFO: Invoking pre-call handler(s)...
INFO: Received ajax response (31 characters)
INFO:
ajax-response/ajax-response
ERROR: Error while parsing response: Could not find root ajax-response
element
INFO: Invoking post-call handler(s)...

We debugged around a bit and discovered that when this behavior happens,
AccessStackPageMap's

accept method is called with instance of PageB as entry parameter. But
instantly after that a request

that came from AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior calls also AccessStackPageMap's

accept method (entry is now the page where AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior was added).
Now reference

of PageB is removed from stack and AccessStackPagemap thinks that user is on
previous page while user

is really on PageB.

I made simplest possible quickstart application that behaves like this. I put
an AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior to

update a component on a page at 2 second intervals. Then I added an Ajax link
and in its onSubmit method I

put thread to sleep for 3 seconds before setResponsePage is called. That way
this behavior can be repeated

always when pressing the button. If the sleep is removed then of course this
happens rarely, but in our real

life application it shows up very frequently.

Should I open a JIRA issue on this and attatch my quickstart application to it?

Regards,

Mikko

RE: AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior problem with HttpSessionStore

2008-12-04 Thread Mikko Pukki

Hi,

Sorry, I forgot to mention that the wicket version we are using, is 1.3.5

- Mikko


Lähettäjä: Mikko Pukki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lähetetty: 4. joulukuuta 2008 22:29
Vastaanottaja: users@wicket.apache.org
Aihe: AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior problem with HttpSessionStore

Hi everybody,



Recently we discovered that SecondLevelCacheSessionStore was giving us a huge
performance hit in some of our applications, so we decided to the old
HttpSessionStore. Performance increase was significant and the impact on memory
usage was relatively small, so we decided to stick with it.



But we also discovered a problem when using AjaxSelfUpdatingbehavior combined
with ajax buttons (when ajax button forwards to another page (let's call is 
PageB) by

setResponsePage method).
When a user hits a button and immediately after that an ajax request is fired 
by the
AjaxSelfUpdatingbehavior, AccessStackPageMap thinks that user has pressed back 
button.



This is what happens when this behavior occurs:

1) User pressed an ajax button

2) AjaxSelUpdatingBehavior fires another ajax request right after user pressed 
button

3) User ends up on PageB

4) now pressing ajax buttons on a new page has no effect

WebRequestCycleProcessor's resolve method goes now to line 114:

   if (pageId != access.getId())
   {
// the page is no longer the active page
// - ignore this request
processRequest = false;
   }



  Wicket Ajax Debug prints something like this:

INFO: Initiating Ajax POST request on ?
wicket:interface=:1:inputForm:back::IActivePageBehaviorListener:0:wicket:ignoreIfNotActive=truerandom=0.6741350924814413
INFO: Invoking pre-call handler(s)...
INFO: Received ajax response (31 characters)
INFO:
ajax-response/ajax-response
ERROR: Error while parsing response: Could not find root ajax-response 
element
INFO: Invoking post-call handler(s)...



We debugged around a bit and discovered that when this behavior happens, 
AccessStackPageMap's

accept method is called with instance of PageB as entry parameter. But 
instantly after that a request

that came from AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior calls also AccessStackPageMap's

accept method (entry is now the page where AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior was added). 
Now reference

of PageB is removed from stack and AccessStackPagemap thinks that user is on 
previous page while user

is really on PageB.



I made simplest possible quickstart application that behaves like this. I put 
an AjaxSelfUpdatingBehavior to

update a component on a page at 2 second intervals. Then I added an Ajax link 
and in its onSubmit method I

put thread to sleep for 3 seconds before setResponsePage is called. That way 
this behavior can be repeated

always when pressing the button. If the sleep is removed then of course this 
happens rarely, but in our real

life application it shows up very frequently.



Should I open a JIRA issue on this and attatch my quickstart application to it?



Regards,

  Mikko
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Another Ajax back button question

2008-12-04 Thread Matt Welch


I'm sure this has been asked and answered but after searching the list, I'm
still not sure if there is something I can do to fix my situation. 

The general gist is this:

1) I make some changes to a page with ajax calls (i.e. replace panel
contents)
2) Click a link to take me away from that page
3) Use browser back button to return to previous page
4) Original page is in the state that it was BEFORE the changes made with
the ajax calls.

Maybe this is a, Well, duh.. of course it is. That's just the way it works
moment, but I could have sworn I've seen this work differently in other
wicket examples and apps I've worked on. 

Any tips?

-Matt

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Another-Ajax-back-button-question-tp20843893p20843893.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Another Ajax back button question

2008-12-04 Thread Scott Swank

If the ajax changes are reflected in the relevant model(s) then you
will see them when you go back to the page.

Scott


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Matt Welch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I'm sure this has been asked and answered but after searching the list, I'm
 still not sure if there is something I can do to fix my situation.

 The general gist is this:

 1) I make some changes to a page with ajax calls (i.e. replace panel
 contents)
 2) Click a link to take me away from that page
 3) Use browser back button to return to previous page
 4) Original page is in the state that it was BEFORE the changes made with
 the ajax calls.

 Maybe this is a, Well, duh.. of course it is. That's just the way it works
 moment, but I could have sworn I've seen this work differently in other
 wicket examples and apps I've worked on.

 Any tips?

 -Matt

 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://www.nabble.com/Another-Ajax-back-button-question-tp20843893p20843893.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Another Ajax back button question

2008-12-04 Thread francesco dicarlo

If you want to manage all the back button events, i suggest you to use a
simple bookmarking library.likeRSH
 We use the ajax calls to insert
some tag that went added to the address after #.
(target.prependjavcascript).
After that, when going back to another tag, there was a script defined on
the body onload method with RSH libraries. There,
if the tag was one of the tags that should activate back button support, we
simulated the click of an ajaxbutton to replace the current state of the
page with the previous state.This was done with javascript and java code in
wicket.


In our project, we used RSH(http://code.google.com/p/reallysimplehistory/).


2008/12/4 Scott Swank [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 If the ajax changes are reflected in the relevant model(s) then you
 will see them when you go back to the page.

 Scott


 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Matt Welch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  I'm sure this has been asked and answered but after searching the list,
 I'm
  still not sure if there is something I can do to fix my situation.
 
  The general gist is this:
 
  1) I make some changes to a page with ajax calls (i.e. replace panel
  contents)
  2) Click a link to take me away from that page
  3) Use browser back button to return to previous page
  4) Original page is in the state that it was BEFORE the changes made with
  the ajax calls.
 
  Maybe this is a, Well, duh.. of course it is. That's just the way it
 works
  moment, but I could have sworn I've seen this work differently in other
  wicket examples and apps I've worked on.
 
  Any tips?
 
  -Matt
 
  --
  View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/Another-Ajax-back-button-question-tp20843893p20843893.html
  Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Where can I download wicket extensions?

2008-12-04 Thread jchappelle


The most logical place would be at
http://www.wicketframework.org/wicket-extensions/.

However the link to the sourceforge site from there gives me old
code(1.2.7). I have a jar right now that is 1.3.2 and I'm not sure where it
came from.

I need the source code so I can customize the wizard component.

Please help.

Thanks,

Josh
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Where-can-I-download-wicket-extensions--tp20844206p20844206.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Another Ajax back button question

2008-12-04 Thread Matt Welch




Scott Swank wrote:
 
 If the ajax changes are reflected in the relevant model(s) then you
 will see them when you go back to the page.
 
Hmmm... perhaps I shouldn't have abstracted my issue and instead discussed
exactly what is happening. Let me change some steps.

1) On a page with a form I enter information and submit the form

2) The page refreshes (normal submit; not ajax) and a panel that was
previously invisible is displayed as the form submission is processed in the
background. This processing is  background task because it can take a very
long time (anywhere between 5 seconds to half an hour). There is an
AjaxSelfUpdatingTimerBehavior with a 5 seconds time attached to the now
visible panel.

3) The AjaxSelfUpdatingTimerBehavior checks the background process in it's
onPostProcessTarget() method and when the background processing is done, the
panel is made invisible again and new panel is made visible with a link to
report on the processing that just took place.

4) Clicking that link takes one to the report and then clicking that browser
back button brings one back to the form page, however, it apparently brings
one back to the form page in the state it was just after the original submit
was clicked. The actual background processing doesn't get kicked off again,
but the in progress panel is visible and remains visible until one cycle
of the AjaxSelfUpdatingTimerBehavior goes by and then the page returns to
the expected state. 

I'd like to figure out a way keep that in progress panel from showing up
when the back button is pressed. 

-Matt

 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Another-Ajax-back-button-question-tp20843893p20844322.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Non-Modal-Popop with DOJO-CONTEXT-Menu

2008-12-04 Thread alexander.elsholz


Hi,

i want to create a new browser-window from a wicket-dojo popup menu (non
modal!). the popup is a pure javascript solution. in wicket there is a
possibility using popupsettings within a link.

a)  is it possible to switch the request to a new browser-window?
(RequestCycle.get())
b)  exist any non-modal window, creating from java-sourcecode, so i can
start the window in onClick method?
c) is it possible to add a link to the dojo-popup

thanks a lot...

regards
Alexander Elsholz
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Non-Modal-Popop-with-DOJO-CONTEXT-Menu-tp20844570p20844570.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Where can I download wicket extensions?

Maven makes this really easy, but if you are managing your jars yourself,
you can still use the Maven repo as a source:

http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/wicket/
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/wicket/wicket-extensions/1.3.2/

Or you can go to the main wicket homepage (wicket.apache.org) and click on
the donwload link for 1.3 - where you can download a zip that has all of the
source and built jars for Wicket.  This is for the latest 1.3 - 1.3.5, but
you should upgrade anyway if at all possible.


-- 
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 4:45 PM, jchappelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 The most logical place would be at
 http://www.wicketframework.org/wicket-extensions/.

 However the link to the sourceforge site from there gives me old
 code(1.2.7). I have a jar right now that is 1.3.2 and I'm not sure where it
 came from.

 I need the source code so I can customize the wizard component.

 Please help.

 Thanks,

 Josh
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/Where-can-I-download-wicket-extensions--tp20844206p20844206.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

@SpringBean with page creation patterns

2008-12-04 Thread quizzical


Hi Everyone,

I'm just getting started with wicket and am learning by playing around with
building an ecommerce application on top of wicket, spring and hibernate.
I've been (Ha!) using @SpringBean to inject my spring dependencies and am
very impressed with it.

One thing I'm wondering about is how to use @SpringBean with a pattern in
the 'wicket in action' book. Specifically, when creating a
bookmarkablePageLink with pageparameters this pattern is used:

public class CheeseDetailsPage extends WebPage {
// bookmarkable constructor
public CheeseDetailsPage(PageParameters parameters) {   #1
this(getCheese(parameters));
}
// non-bookmarkable constructor
public CheeseDetailsPage(Cheese cheese) { #2
// do cheesy stuff with the cheese
}
/** Retrieves a cheese object based on the ‘name’ parameter. */
public static Cheese getCheese(PageParameters parameters) { #3
String name = parameters.getString(name, );
if(.equals(name)) return null;
CheeseDao dao = ...;
return dao.getCheeseByName(name);
}
}

I like this pattern but i'm having a problem with injecting my dependencies.
The getCheese() method is static, which means that the CheeseDao would have
to be static. I haven't delved into the code of the @SpringBean proxy or the
wicket serialization code (I have read the wiki on @SpringBean) and I don't
have an amazing understanding of proxies so maybe i'm just being obtuse but
heres my question.

Is there any reason not to make the DAO static?

Cheers in advance

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/%40SpringBean-with-page-creation-patterns-tp20845794p20845794.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

how to print only one validation message from a listview of radiobuttons

2008-12-04 Thread novotny


Hi,

I have a ListView containing several RadioButtons.setRequired(true) (a Q  A
list) that are all required to be answered. However, if someone doesn't
click on all of the radio buttons, I see three Please answer the question
messages on the feedback panel. How can I just consolidate it so only one
message appears if any of the questions i.e. radiobuttons is not selected?

Thanks, Jason
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/how-to-print-only-one-validation-message-from-a-listview-of-radiobuttons-tp20846684p20846684.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation


You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you 
wouldn't be able to do that with Enums.


You will have to use Strings.

Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what 
you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:


http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

Good luck!!

Cheers,
Bruno

miro wrote:

I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication annotation)
in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

/**
 * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
	 * 
	 * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length array by

default
 */
String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {

LIASION_OFFICER,
GRANTS_OFFICER,
PROGRAM_ANALYST,
ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example 


@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error 


The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be a
constant expression  .please help me resolve this .
  


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation


I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;

@AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
public class EnumAnnotation {

}

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
@interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

   Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

}

class Role {
}

class User extends Role {
}

class Admin extends Role {
}

So, the only thing that must change is the annotation 
@AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.


Thoughts anyone?

cheers,
Bruno


Bruno Borges wrote:

You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you 
wouldn't be able to do that with Enums.


You will have to use Strings.

Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish 
what you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:


http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

Good luck!!

Cheers,
Bruno

miro wrote:
I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication 
annotation)

in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

/**
 * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
 *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero 
length array by

default
 */
String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {

LIASION_OFFICER,

GRANTS_OFFICER,
PROGRAM_ANALYST,
ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example
@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error
The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must 
be a

constant expression  .please help me resolve this .
  


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless you
use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I would
want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

 import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
 import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
 import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
 import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
 import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
 import java.lang.annotation.Target;

 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
 public class EnumAnnotation {

 }

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

   Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

 }

 class Role {
 }

 class User extends Role {
 }

 class Admin extends Role {
 }

 So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
 @AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

 Thoughts anyone?

 cheers,
 Bruno



 Bruno Borges wrote:

 You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

 Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you wouldn't
 be able to do that with Enums.

 You will have to use Strings.

 Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what
 you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

 Good luck!!

 Cheers,
 Bruno

 miro wrote:

 I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
 annotation)
 in my pages , the code for this annotation

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

/**
 * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
 *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
 array by
 default
 */
String[] value() default {};
 }


 I created my enum with representing authorities

 public enum  Authorities {
LIASION_OFFICER,
GRANTS_OFFICER,
PROGRAM_ANALYST,
ADMIN;

 }

 I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example
 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
 public class HomePage extends BasePage {


 this line does not compile, I get the error
 The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be a
 constant expression  .please help me resolve this .



 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

Well... You don't have to create one java file for each class. You can 
put all of them on the same file, like:


public final class MyAppRoles {
   private MyAppRoles() {}
   public static final class Admin extends Role {
   private Admin() {}
   }

   public static final class User extends Role {
   private User() {}
   }
}

Note that this is really type-safe, and these classes will never be 
instantiated.
But, I'm not defending that we should change that. I'm just showing a 
possibility. :-)


I really did't understand why Sun decided to reject Enums as Objects in 
this context of annotations.


cheers,
Bruno

James Carman wrote:

I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless you
use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I would
want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

  

I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;

@AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
public class EnumAnnotation {

}

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
@interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

  Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

}

class Role {
}

class User extends Role {
}

class Admin extends Role {
}

So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
@AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

Thoughts anyone?

cheers,
Bruno



Bruno Borges wrote:



You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you wouldn't
be able to do that with Enums.

You will have to use Strings.

Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what
you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

Good luck!!

Cheers,
Bruno

miro wrote:

  

I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
annotation)
in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

   /**
* Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
*  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
array by
default
*/
   String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {
   LIASION_OFFICER,
   GRANTS_OFFICER,
   PROGRAM_ANALYST,
   ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example
@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error
The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be a
constant expression  .please help me resolve this .




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





  


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

What do you mean by Enums as Objects?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 Well... You don't have to create one java file for each class. You can put
 all of them on the same file, like:

 public final class MyAppRoles {
   private MyAppRoles() {}
   public static final class Admin extends Role {
   private Admin() {}
   }

   public static final class User extends Role {
   private User() {}
   }
 }

 Note that this is really type-safe, and these classes will never be
 instantiated.
 But, I'm not defending that we should change that. I'm just showing a
 possibility. :-)

 I really did't understand why Sun decided to reject Enums as Objects in
 this context of annotations.

 cheers,
 Bruno

 James Carman wrote:

 I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless
 you
 use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I
 would
 want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
 would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:



 I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

 import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
 import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
 import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
 import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
 import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
 import java.lang.annotation.Target;

 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
 public class EnumAnnotation {

 }

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

  Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

 }

 class Role {
 }

 class User extends Role {
 }

 class Admin extends Role {
 }

 So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
 @AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

 Thoughts anyone?

 cheers,
 Bruno



 Bruno Borges wrote:



 You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

 Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you
 wouldn't
 be able to do that with Enums.

 You will have to use Strings.

 Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what
 you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
 
 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
 


 Good luck!!

 Cheers,
 Bruno

 miro wrote:



 I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
 annotation)
 in my pages , the code for this annotation

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

   /**
* Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
*  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
 array by
 default
*/
   String[] value() default {};
 }


 I created my enum with representing authorities

 public enum  Authorities {
   LIASION_OFFICER,
   GRANTS_OFFICER,
   PROGRAM_ANALYST,
   ADMIN;

 }

 I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an
 example
 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
 public class HomePage extends BasePage {


 this line does not compile, I get the error
 The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be
 a
 constant expression  .please help me resolve this .




 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]








 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation


Well... you can't do this:

@Foo(values={MyEnum.FOO,  MyEnum.BAR});

@interface Foo {
 Object[] values() default {};
}

James Carman wrote:

What do you mean by Enums as Objects?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

  

Well... You don't have to create one java file for each class. You can put
all of them on the same file, like:

public final class MyAppRoles {
  private MyAppRoles() {}
  public static final class Admin extends Role {
  private Admin() {}
  }

  public static final class User extends Role {
  private User() {}
  }
}

Note that this is really type-safe, and these classes will never be
instantiated.
But, I'm not defending that we should change that. I'm just showing a
possibility. :-)

I really did't understand why Sun decided to reject Enums as Objects in
this context of annotations.

cheers,
Bruno

James Carman wrote:



I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless
you
use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I
would
want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

wrote:



  

I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;

@AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
public class EnumAnnotation {

}

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
@interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

 Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

}

class Role {
}

class User extends Role {
}

class Admin extends Role {
}

So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
@AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

Thoughts anyone?

cheers,
Bruno



Bruno Borges wrote:





You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you
wouldn't
be able to do that with Enums.

You will have to use Strings.

Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what
you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
  
Good luck!!


Cheers,
Bruno

miro wrote:



  

I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
annotation)
in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

  /**
   * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
   *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
array by
default
   */
  String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {
  LIASION_OFFICER,
  GRANTS_OFFICER,
  PROGRAM_ANALYST,
  ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an
example
@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error
The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be
a
constant expression  .please help me resolve this .






-
  

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]







  

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





  


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

But, you can declare the values property to be of type MyEnum[].  Is what
we're really looking for here the ability to extend an enum (if that even
makes sense)?  I've often thought it would be nice if I could add stuff to
an enum from the outside.  But, that kind of goes against the idea of an
enum, doesn't it?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

 Well... you can't do this:

 @Foo(values={MyEnum.FOO,  MyEnum.BAR});

 @interface Foo {
  Object[] values() default {};

 }

 James Carman wrote:

 What do you mean by Enums as Objects?

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:



 Well... You don't have to create one java file for each class. You can
 put
 all of them on the same file, like:

 public final class MyAppRoles {
  private MyAppRoles() {}
  public static final class Admin extends Role {
  private Admin() {}
  }

  public static final class User extends Role {
  private User() {}
  }
 }

 Note that this is really type-safe, and these classes will never be
 instantiated.
 But, I'm not defending that we should change that. I'm just showing a
 possibility. :-)

 I really did't understand why Sun decided to reject Enums as Objects in
 this context of annotations.

 cheers,
 Bruno

 James Carman wrote:



 I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless
 you
 use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I
 would
 want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
 would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

 On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 wrote:





 I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

 import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
 import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
 import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
 import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
 import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
 import java.lang.annotation.Target;

 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
 public class EnumAnnotation {

 }

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

  Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

 }

 class Role {
 }

 class User extends Role {
 }

 class Admin extends Role {
 }

 So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
 @AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

 Thoughts anyone?

 cheers,
 Bruno



 Bruno Borges wrote:





 You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

 Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you
 wouldn't
 be able to do that with Enums.

 You will have to use Strings.

 Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish
 what
 you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
 
 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
 
 

 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
  Good luck!!

 Cheers,
 Bruno

 miro wrote:





 I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
 annotation)
 in my pages , the code for this annotation

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

  /**
   * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
   *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
 array by
 default
   */
  String[] value() default {};
 }


 I created my enum with representing authorities

 public enum  Authorities {
  LIASION_OFFICER,
  GRANTS_OFFICER,
  PROGRAM_ANALYST,
  ADMIN;

 }

 I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an
 example
 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
 public class HomePage extends BasePage {


 this line does not compile, I get the error
 The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must
 be
 a
 constant expression  .please help me resolve this .






 -


 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]









 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]








 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: how to print only one validation message from a listview of radiobuttons

2008-12-04 Thread Ned Collyer


Should you be using a RadioChoice instead?


novotny wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 I have a ListView containing several RadioButtons.setRequired(true) (a Q 
 A list) that are all required to be answered. However, if someone doesn't
 click on all of the radio buttons, I see three Please answer the
 question messages on the feedback panel. How can I just consolidate it so
 only one message appears if any of the questions i.e. radiobuttons is not
 selected?
 
 Thanks, Jason
 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/how-to-print-only-one-validation-message-from-a-listview-of-radiobuttons-tp20846684p20847927.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

It is not possible to extend enums nor annotations. And as the question 
here is about the use of @AuthorizeInstantiation, there's no way to 
declare MyEnum[], of course :-)


So, the only way, for now, to have type-safety is using that 
Class-thing. I don't vote for this though. A simple class with String 
constants does de job quite well. :-D


James Carman wrote:

But, you can declare the values property to be of type MyEnum[].  Is what
we're really looking for here the ability to extend an enum (if that even
makes sense)?  I've often thought it would be nice if I could add stuff to
an enum from the outside.  But, that kind of goes against the idea of an
enum, doesn't it?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:

  

Well... you can't do this:

@Foo(values={MyEnum.FOO,  MyEnum.BAR});

@interface Foo {
 Object[] values() default {};

}

James Carman wrote:



What do you mean by Enums as Objects?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

wrote:



  

Well... You don't have to create one java file for each class. You can
put
all of them on the same file, like:

public final class MyAppRoles {
 private MyAppRoles() {}
 public static final class Admin extends Role {
 private Admin() {}
 }

 public static final class User extends Role {
 private User() {}
 }
}

Note that this is really type-safe, and these classes will never be
instantiated.
But, I'm not defending that we should change that. I'm just showing a
possibility. :-)

I really did't understand why Sun decided to reject Enums as Objects in
this context of annotations.

cheers,
Bruno

James Carman wrote:





I don't know about this.  It would work (and break existing code, unless
you
use something other than value for the annotation).  I don't know if I
would
want to have to create a new class for each role in my project.  Yes, it
would be a small price to pay, but it just feels wrong.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED]


  

wrote:





  

I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;

@AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
public class EnumAnnotation {

}

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
@interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

 Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

}

class Role {
}

class User extends Role {
}

class Admin extends Role {
}

So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
@AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

Thoughts anyone?

cheers,
Bruno



Bruno Borges wrote:







You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you
wouldn't
be able to do that with Enums.

You will have to use Strings.

Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish
what
you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
  



http://www.iam.unibe.ch/%7Eakuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/
 Good luck!!

Cheers,
Bruno

miro wrote:





  

I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
annotation)
in my pages , the code for this annotation

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
@Documented
@Inherited
public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

 /**
  * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
  *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
array by
default
  */
 String[] value() default {};
}


I created my enum with representing authorities

public enum  Authorities {
 LIASION_OFFICER,
 GRANTS_OFFICER,
 PROGRAM_ANALYST,
 ADMIN;

}

I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an
example
@AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.name()})
public class HomePage extends BasePage {


this line does not compile, I get the error
The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must
be
a
constant expression  .please help me resolve this .








-


  

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]









  

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,

Re: how to print only one validation message from a listview of radiobuttons

You can write a custom validator that checks all three and gives one message
if any are not completed.  Done correctly, it could be very reusable - give
it an array of components that it checks and a resource key to get the
message.



On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:22 PM, novotny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Hi,

 I have a ListView containing several RadioButtons.setRequired(true) (a Q 
 A
 list) that are all required to be answered. However, if someone doesn't
 click on all of the radio buttons, I see three Please answer the question
 messages on the feedback panel. How can I just consolidate it so only one
 message appears if any of the questions i.e. radiobuttons is not selected?

 Thanks, Jason
 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/how-to-print-only-one-validation-message-from-a-listview-of-radiobuttons-tp20846684p20846684.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-- 
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com

Re: IChainingModel

2008-12-04 Thread Igor Vaynberg

when you give propertymodel anoter imodel do you have to begin the
expression with object to get the value out?

-igor

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:31 AM, jWeekend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 John,

 Well spotted. AbstractPropertyModel implements IChainingModel but breaks its
 contract :
  * Models that implement this interface will support chaining of IModels.
 getObject() of a
  * IChainingModel should do something like:
  *
  * pre
  * if ( object instanceof IModel) { return ((IModel)object).getObject()}
  * else return object;
  * /pre

 Its getObject() implementation does not abide by this.
/**
 * @see org.apache.wicket.model.IModel#getObject()
 */
public Object getObject()
{
final String expression = propertyExpression();
if (Strings.isEmpty(expression))
{
// Return a meaningful value for an empty property 
 expression
return getTarget();
}

final Object target = getTarget();
if (target != null)
{
return PropertyResolver.getValue(expression, target);
}
return null;
}

 Regards - Cemal
 http://www.jWeekend.co.uk http://jWeekend.co.uk



 John Patterson wrote:

 Hi,

 I'm messing about with nested models and see the IChainingModel interface
 which is implemented by the PropertyModels but its methods never actually
 seems to be used.

 So I'm just checking that I haven't missed anything... for nested models I
 don't actually need to implement this right?

 This is its def:


 public interface IChainingModelT extends IModelT
 {
   /**
* Sets the model that is chained inside this model.
*
* @param model
*/
   public void setChainedModel(IModel ?  model);

   /**
* Returns the chained model if there is a chained model.
*
* @return The chained model
*/
   public IModel ?  getChainedModel();

 }

 Thanks,

 John




 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://www.nabble.com/IChainingModel-tp20835085p20835745.html
 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using annotation @AuthorizeInstantiation

If you were going to do this, it would be much better (IMHO) to use
interfaces...  This gives you interesting possibilities:

(Disclaimer - the following is not an original thought - Igor mentioned this
last week - give credit where it's due)

interface User

interface Admin extends User

interface ProjectManager extends Admin

interface SalesManager extends Admin

HERE'S THE KICKER:

interface TheBigBoss extends ProjectManager, SalesManager

Since those are just marker interfaces, I guess each of those would need
something like a single public static final implementation like:
public static final TheBigBoss INSTANCE = new TheBigBoss() {};

Something like that - anyway, MULTIPLE INHERITANCE FOR ROLES RULES!


-- 
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:33 PM, Bruno Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've found a way to implement a type-safe check for this. Here it goes:

 import java.lang.annotation.Documented;
 import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
 import java.lang.annotation.Inherited;
 import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
 import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
 import java.lang.annotation.Target;

 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value = { User.class, Admin.class })
 public class EnumAnnotation {

 }

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

   Class? extends Role[] value() default {};

 }

 class Role {
 }

 class User extends Role {
 }

 class Admin extends Role {
 }

 So, the only thing that must change is the annotation
 @AuthorizeInstantiation, to accept classes that extends roles.

 Thoughts anyone?

 cheers,
 Bruno



 Bruno Borges wrote:

 You simply can't do that because the nature of Annotations.

 Even if AuthorizeInstantiation's values were of type Object[] you wouldn't
 be able to do that with Enums.

 You will have to use Strings.

 Although there's some hack you can make using Java 6 to accomplish what
 you want. If you are interested, take a look at this link:

 http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~akuhn/blog/2008/roman-numerals-in-your-java/

 Good luck!!

 Cheers,
 Bruno

 miro wrote:

 I am using this  @AuthorizeInstantiation   (wicket authetication
 annotation)
 in my pages , the code for this annotation

 @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
 @Target( { ElementType.PACKAGE, ElementType.TYPE })
 @Documented
 @Inherited
 public @interface AuthorizeInstantiation {

/**
 * Gets the roles that are allowed to take the action.
 *  * @return the roles that are allowed. Returns a zero length
 array by
 default
 */
String[] value() default {};
 }


 I created my enum with representing authorities

 public enum  Authorities {
LIASION_OFFICER,
GRANTS_OFFICER,
PROGRAM_ANALYST,
ADMIN;

 }

 I am trying to use  AuthorizeInstantiation   in my page  here an example
 @AuthorizeInstantiation(value={Authorities.LIASION_OFFICER.namehttp://authorities.liasion_officer.name/
 ()})
 public class HomePage extends BasePage {


 this line does not compile, I get the error
 The value of annotation attribute AuthorizeInstantiation .value must be a
 constant expression  .please help me resolve this .



 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: IChainingModel

John, Cemal - that method in AbstractPropertyModel absolutely does abide by
the contract - look at what it calls (getTarget()):

public final Object getTarget()
{
Object object = target;
while (object instanceof IModel)
{
Object tmp = ((IModel?)object).getObject();
if (tmp == object)
break;
object = tmp;
}
return object;
}
John - I think you're right - it is unnecessary to implement IChainingModel
since there is no code in the wicket core codebase that calls it's methods.
Just make sure that if you nest models inside of other custom models, you do
call detach properly or you can end up with a memory leak.  You can see this
blog post as a simple example:
http://www.jeremythomerson.com/blog/2008/11/06/wicket-the-power-of-nested-models/

Hope this helps.

-- 
Jeremy Thomerson
http://www.wickettraining.com


On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 9:31 AM, jWeekend [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:


 John,

 Well spotted. AbstractPropertyModel implements IChainingModel but breaks
 its
 contract :
  * Models that implement this interface will support chaining of IModels.
 getObject() of a
  * IChainingModel should do something like:
  *
  * pre
  * if ( object instanceof IModel) { return ((IModel)object).getObject()}
  * else return object;
  * /pre

 Its getObject() implementation does not abide by this.
/**
 * @see org.apache.wicket.model.IModel#getObject()
 */
public Object getObject()
{
final String expression = propertyExpression();
if (Strings.isEmpty(expression))
{
// Return a meaningful value for an empty property
 expression
return getTarget();
}

final Object target = getTarget();
if (target != null)
{
return PropertyResolver.getValue(expression,
 target);
}
return null;
}

 Regards - Cemal
 http://www.jWeekend.co.uk http://www.jweekend.co.uk/
 http://jWeekend.co.uk http://jweekend.co.uk/



 John Patterson wrote:
 
  Hi,
 
  I'm messing about with nested models and see the IChainingModel interface
  which is implemented by the PropertyModels but its methods never actually
  seems to be used.
 
  So I'm just checking that I haven't missed anything... for nested models
 I
  don't actually need to implement this right?
 
  This is its def:
 
 
  public interface IChainingModelT extends IModelT
  {
/**
 * Sets the model that is chained inside this model.
 *
 * @param model
 */
public void setChainedModel(IModel ?  model);
 
/**
 * Returns the chained model if there is a chained model.
 *
 * @return The chained model
 */
public IModel ?  getChainedModel();
 
  }
 
  Thanks,
 
  John
 
 
 

 --
 View this message in context:
 http://www.nabble.com/IChainingModel-tp20835085p20835745.html
  Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: @SpringBean with page creation patterns