Larsson, Jonas wrote:
Can someone please give me a pointer to how to customize the formatter for
rendering date objects (and it's subclasses). I am trying to render a
java.sql.Timestamp property and it only shows the date (not the time) AND
the date is on the wrong locale.
I remember seeing
Weasel wrote:
According to the docs at
http://wiki.opensymphony.com/space/WebWork+Expression+Language+Syntax
you can check a getFoo() for existence by doing webwork:if testfoo
in a JSP.
That doesnt seem to work for me in WW2, neither if or else gets
executed Any ideas?
Regards Peter
it's
Jonas Eriksson wrote:
I don't know which method killingar uses, but I've attached my
method which uses awt and javax.imageio.ImageIO (maybe only jdk1.4).
Ah sorry, the generation of thumbnails is in:
http://subversion.killingar.net:8080/svn/skbase/src/net/killingar/GenerateThumbnails.java
remigijus wrote:
This question is not about ww, but I hope some suggestions will be given.
I need some library for image processing on the server side. I want
to make thumbnail image file from an image file uploaded by user.
I have this as part of my SKForum app, which is open source
I have ported the changes in XMLActionConfiguration that allows view
mapping to be reloaded over to PropertiesConfiguration. It's a bit ugly
but it works. The only trouble I had was that
1)views.properties handling needs to be seperate somehow from
webwork.properties, I have hardcoded this in
boxed wrote:
2) I couldn't stop WW from caching the lookups, until I realized I had
to set webwork.viewmapping=webwork.dispatcher.ConfigurationViewMapping
in webwork.properties. This is not documented for reloading the XML
configuration
(http://www.opensymphony.com/webwork/cookbook
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
Hmm this is pretty interesting. Id like to hear the opinion from the
1.4 guys on this as well.
I for one dispise the ${} JSTL/whatever syntax above all else. It's just
plain retarded. Now, I realize that having to put ' around strings can
be seen as annoying (although
Drew McAuliffe wrote:
I agree, and I think that it should be the ${} syntax. The reason I like the
optional syntax is solely for backwards compatibility.
I don't see why you are using java if you prefer that way of writing
personally.
Let's compare the alternaitves:
ww:property value=name/
Patrick Lightbody wrote:
Well, it is kind of amusing Mathias is saying he'll switch to 1.3, given
that these changes make 2.0 have the exact same interface/tags/etc as
1.x :P
-Pat
Except the property tag I hope :P
Anders Hovmöller
---
This
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Would anyone mind terribly if I had shuffled things around in ww 1.3?
The directory structure is annoying, the changes I'd like to make are
to bring it more inline with other os projects, including:
Great! Please consider applying my changes for more efficient
Dick Zetterberg wrote:
Not creating a new HashMap all the time sounds like a good idea. I'd prefer to have it created lazily though so that it is not created when it is not needed (when you do not have any parameters for example).
Concerning the StringBuffer re-use: Did you measure the
I have a pretty large velocity page that needs to generate a lot of
urls, and I noticed that the roughly 4000 urls generated with the
URLBean class took about two seconds to generate. I took a look at the
code and saw that it creates and throws away a StringBuffer AND a
HashMap every single
Pat Lightbody wrote:
That was a typo -- I'd only escape things that didn't have bodies to avoid
that very confusion. What say you?
That sounds fine, although I'm not too keen on the always escape thing
since I won't use it myself. I have my own tranformations I want to do
that are a bit
Pat Lightbody wrote:
There are a few open issues with regards to escaping -- none of which
all agree how it should be handled. Some want UI tags to escape, some
want them not to. Some want the URL tag to escape, others don't. I am
leaning towards this:
* UI tags, property, iterate, text, etc
Jason Carreira wrote:
I've added a section on the WebWork page which lists products using
WebWork
http://wiki.opensymphony.com/space/WebWork
Feel free to add yours...
Jason
Added SK Forum.
Anders Hovmöller
---
This sf.net email is
Jason Carreira wrote:
The major changes are:
1) the ww:property tag does not do 3 things anymore :-) We now have a
ww:push tag as well as the ww:property tag
Don't scare me here.. please tell me the property tag only does one
thing and that there's a tag for that elusive third use!
Anders
Jason Carreira wrote:
Unfortunately no... Which is why some of the pages were locked. When
Atlassian gets Confluence a little further along, maybe we can beg and
plead to get to use it :-) It has a nice visual diff tool and
versions...
I have a little wiki engine based on Silo that has
I have made some corrections and additions to the wiki but as I was to
attach my migration classes to the migration document it turned out I
don't have access to this. Could someone please correct this?
Also, while Im on the matter, has snipsnap added support for historical
data? Because I am
Nils Hartmann wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently migrating a WW1 application to XW1/WW2.
I noticed the following points not mentioned in the Webwork 2 Migration
Guide (http://wiki.opensymphony.com/space/WebWork+2+Migration+Guide);
maybe some of these points are interesting for other who want to
migrate
Francisco Hernandez wrote:
I've been getting this exception lately, I'm not sure if its
tomcat-4.1.24 thats messed up, webwork or something else, anyone else
having problems like these?
[snip]
root cause
java.lang.OutOfMemoryError
Apache Tomcat/4.1.24-LE-jdk14
You've run out of memory. You
Andrew Hawkes wrote:
As I understand it, a simple GET to somepage.vm does not create an
Action and therefore dynamic data for that page is not populated. Is
there a way I can change this behavior, to make an Action be created
by default when a user simply requests the template file?
My
Jason Carreira wrote:
You should try out the FQN plugin for IDEA... It makes it as easy as
CTRL-SHIFT-Q to get the fully qualified name.
On the other hand, if you need a tool to do it, it's obviously not a
good system.
Anders Hovmöller
I had a discussion on #java with Epesh, and he expressed the sentiment
that WW2 might be turning into a too complex system which will alienate
new users and be popular with the gearheads and such when it leaves
nerd-domain. After reading the responses to the Simplicity in WW2
email I must
Mike Cannon-Brookes wrote:
You can already test actions to setup xwork.xml - just instantiate the
object, call your setter methods and run!
Are you trying to scare users away now? I was talking WW2, not XW, so a
web-based interface where you can get immediate feedback in the
environment
I have tried migrating my quite large app to WW2, these are my issues with
it:
http://wiki.opensymphony.com/space/WebWork+2+Migration+Guide specifies that:
ActionSupport has moved from webwork.ActionSupport to
com.opensymphony.xwork.ActionSupport,
but a deprecated webwork.ActionSupport and
[migration classes]
These were added by Patrick a while back, and it was decided to remove
them, rather than carry over old stuff. It's suggested that you extend
from com.opensymphony.xwork.ActionSupport instead, possibly having a
parent class for your actions which provides the calls to
I've noticed that the taglibs in WW2 can't be reused properly (values
aren't
reset to null, so they provide for some VERY strange behavior). Can anyone
with experience with JSP taglibs look in to this?
Reset to null when? The JSP spec clearly states they CANNOT be reset when
after the tag has
after getting the value thru the querystring qid how do i set it to a
method in my class and send it as a parameter.
in my class i have a method called
public void setQID(int _qid){
this._qid=_qid;
}
and in my JSP,
poll:property value=$qid/hr
poll:action
Or ww:store name=foo/?
John.
I like store... anyone got any better ideas?
Store is very bad, it sounds like it writes something to disk or something.
The alternatives register, put and define are all much better from a
samantic point of view. Export, publish are names I prefer personally.
XWork may change this significantly.
Nope, this will still work the same way in XWork.
Can't we add an result-base-path or sth. like that so that
/success.jsp can be mapped to /WEB-INF/views/success.jsp? This would
make the configuration file more readable. If the parameter defaults to
or /
I need to access the iterator index for a list i'm iterating over, using
the webwork jsp taglib. Is there a way to access the current index
value from within the iterator tag?
Of course.
ww:iterator value=users status='status'
iterates over users and puts a
I am new to webwork and start running examples. I can not figure out how
url: http://localhost:8080/webwork/tests/multiform!default.action maps to
jsp page and action.
Could any body explain to me? why not just multiform.action ?
The above is an example of a command driven action. Normal
Yup, I personally like SnipSnap, but it's got a lot of missing features
that
make it just not good enough. Mainly:
1) Email notifications
Hmm... should be easy to fix.
2) Revision history
Check.
3) File attachments
Trivial.
4) WikiNaming support (I hate doing [Foo Bar], I like FooBar)
I recently had a bit of a cold shower from trying to use the ww:checkbox
with a boolean member of my actions.
First of all the syntax is pretty bad:
ww:checkbox name='frozen' fieldValue=frozen label='frozen' /
the fieldValue should be called value and if not specified should
default to the name
Also, what happens if there are no public constructors? I don't think the
assumption that every
model bean will have a public default constructor is a good one.
The JavaBean specification is very clear on that issue. If a class has no
public default constructor it is by definition not a bean.
3.) A list of all possible views.properties entries like
action.* what is available and what does it do. I'm aware of the basic
ones:
foo.action, foo.success, foo.error, foo.none, foo.input, foo.login for
having looked at the Action interface but are there any other possible? I
don't
If Ognl is just totally unacceptable, then let's discuss two options:
When we discussed this in #java it sounded to me like one could plug in a
custom syntax parser into OGNL, thus solving this issue nicely. Did I
misunderstand?
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://boxed.killingar.net
I proposed the ability to associate URL's with actions. When the URL is
requested the action is executed and the association is removed. This
removes the need for any Javascript solution or any hidden fields or any
such tricks.
Would the result of this execution be stored so that the second
It could be possible to add a flag for whether includes are mandatory or
not.
Seems like this is exactly what interceptors are for. You don't want to have
actions accessible directly from a url? Then add the interceptor that
prevents it.
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A little poll:
As long as you are aware that any result from this poll is basically
meaningless I'm fine with this. It was pretty obvious last time this type of
thing was asked on the mailing list (URLTag) and it was acted on the result,
that the response that was given was grossly misleading.
For those who want to use EJB's to do the tx demaraction, you'd simply
remove the tx interceptor.
You mean not add it, I hope. The basic configuration should imho be as clean
as possible.
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://boxed.killingar.net
I suppose no one bothered to include some kind of migration path for this
bugfix like I said was needed?
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://boxed.killingar.net
- Original Message -
From: Vedovato Paolo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Webwork (E-Mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday,
After having read all comments on the changes I wanted to make, as well
as some not-so-nice comments by people on #java (boxed and Joe Ottinger
for example), I've decided that it's not a good idea for me to be
architecting XWork.
Afaik, the only thing me and epesh said was that we're afraid
Why is it more convenient than tying it to a result page? Or do you run
the action without a result?
I will run the action without a result a few times to start off to make sure
it compiles and goes through to success and so forth. I also have some (very
few) actions that don't actually have a
Currently, there's no way to
keep people from executing your actions without creating a separate J2EE
declarative security entry for each action (and each alias, etc). This
is, IMHO, a HUGE drawback.
...or just a servlet filter.
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://boxed.killingar.net
If there is an exception during GenericDispatcher.executeAction() the
ActionTag simply silently prints a stack trace and gets on with its
business. This is not at all a good idea, since in doEndTag()
GenericDispatcher.finish() is called without a try-catch block. This has the
consequence that if
Pretty much, yes. There's no real trouble with allowing .action
invocations as before, but if it's possible to get them to go away it
would be nice.
I find having the actions available directly with the .action notation very
handy for developing/debugging. I am hoping you mean possible to
Is it possible to run a servlet container and debug webwork from within
eclipse or Idea?
Yes of course, it's just like any other remote debugging in java. I use
resin and they have a description on how to set this up on their homepage.
It's basically just starting the JVM with remote debugging
* Chaining. IMHO this needs a big rethink, and most of all we need to
check: what are the usecases to be implemented.
What would be an alternative way of doing chaining? Your example where the
chaining is done in code and is specified by the action itself is just not
acceptable for me, as it
[1].name -- ../name
does this mean you can do [someInt].name? In any case I find the WW EL
syntax clearer. Is it possible to plug in a different parser to OGNL that
takes WW syntax instead?
Anders Hovmöller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://boxed.killingar.net
My company has a client (one of the big 3 'Reiseportal' application in
Germany) which has
bought Websphere and IBM portal server one year ago. The development cycle
is very very
bad, and now, we have to make some proposal to use another portal
framework. I already think
about Webwork.
Well
In current WebWork the main focus is on actions.
I miss the EXPLICIT implementation of the concept dialog.
WebWork is an engine for the controller and view parts of you app only. For
your model you have to write your own code, and in this layer you can have
your state machine if you like.
I thought there was some agreement a while back that the Property Tag
should
not print out the value if it has an id attribute, but the check for this
(BasicPropertyTag line 101) hasn't made it into the repository.
Could/should
this be changed before the release of 1.3, if it is not too late?
I'm not sure if its necessary or not so you let me explain the problem.
Lets say you have a multi-paged user profile service. After you submit a
page, the destination success page depends on your current role (e.g.
child vs. adult). How would you build that intelligence into a WW
action?
It struck me while writing ww:textfield name='foo' label='foo'
value=foo / that the name should default to the name of the value and the
label should default to the name or something like that. I almost never
write different names for value, name and label, and if I did I'd probably
just change
I can imaging that I would want to use one and the same action in multiple
contexts, thus needing to point to another destination.
I would have expected something like Context1.CDList.success=cdlist1.jsp
and
Context2.CDList.success=cdlist2.jsp.
Is this possible in current WebWork?
Yes, this
I return a very, very long list and would like to be able to page through
it. I have a startIndex and count. The link to the next page should be
startIndex=(startIndex+count); Since the business end was getting the list
in the first place, this indexing stuff seemed like it belonged on the
[print, context, focus]
Those three tags are ok, but I'm not sure about the names. Before I had
read about them I thought context did was focus do (i.e. pushing the
result of evaluating a property to the stack).
Any better name suggestions?
This is the really hard part about these tags
What about 'select'?
select should be reserved for a ui tag for select controls imho.
// Anders Hovmöller
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
-out or print (ww:out value=foo/bar/)
-push (ww:push value=fooww:out value=bar//ww:push)
-set (ww:set value=foo/bar id=blah/ ww:out value=@blah/)
Yes - these are good names IMHO!
After reading lots of names, print, push and set all seem intuitively to
do
the right things?
Print a
Attached to this email I have the code for the following tags: ContextTag,
FocusTag, PopTag, PushTag and PrintTag. These do what PropertyTag does today
and more:
ww:context id=foo value=bar/ pulls bar from the valuestack and puts
it into the page context as foo.
ww:focus value=foo/ww:focus moves
What is the use of push pop tags that isn't served by the focus tag?
I added pop just for orthogonality really, but the pop tag I added because I
have a vague memory of someone wanting that functionality. I may be mistaken
though, and I don't really think it should be needed personally. If no
Index: BeanUtil.java
===
RCS file:
/cvsroot/opensymphony/webwork/src/main/webwork/util/BeanUtil.java,v
retrieving revision 1.29
diff -r1.29 BeanUtil.java
121c121
log.warn(Bean copy failed:+e, e);
---
log.warn(Bean
1) Changing the behavior of the PropertyTag hurts our userbase.
No examples given. Thus an unfounded opinion with no base in logic.
2) Adding addional tags makes the PropertyTag (and the taglibs as a
whole) more confusing, not less.
Adding tags that are simple and straight forwards makes
I had some issues with a setter and a getter having different types in an
action chain. This blew up hard in my face and BeanUtils didn't give me any
hint as to what was wrong. I have attached a diff with a suggested fix for
this. (The diff includes my last change too, sorry about that)
// Anders
I've just checked in new and enhanced documentation for PropertyTag,
kindly submitted by Geoff Carruthers (who did put his money where his
mouth is, as told, and wrote docs). I'd appreciate it others could have
a look and provide feedback, since Geoff has said he's willing to write
up more
The docs are NOT original pulled out of thin air type docs. They're
just a consolidation of what you, Mike, and various others have
written. Feel free to plaster your name and credits wherever you feel
is appropriate. In future I'll try to remember to discourage anyone who
wants to write docs
Erik, the property tag will never undergo a major change in behavior.
The amount of code that this would break would be huge. Everyone who
ever used the Taglibs would have to have a development iteration just
to recode their Views to handle the new behavior.
I believe there was a bit of a
Again, as if this hasn't been reiterated enough times. simplicity is
key. People like views.properties, why not keep them happy? It's like
the propertytag debate. People like the idiosyncratic way it worked,
why modify it just to enforce some arbitrary perception of correctness?
69 matches
Mail list logo
