Re: How to read cookie from different domain?
It is not possible to read a cookie from a different domain. That would be a
terrible security problem.
The browser will not send cookies that do not match your domain so no amount
of code tricks on the server handling this request will get you the cookie.
The third party cookies settings in browsers controls whether it is
possible to set cookies in requests for images and other assets for a page
that come from a domain that is different than the page's domain.
On Feb 16, 2011 7:58 AM, Paolo irresistible...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I need to read a cookie from a different domain (it is not mine).
I known the name ok cookie.
When I create (write) a cookie, it is possible to set the name of domain:
cookie.setDomain(.example.com);
But It does'nt work for foreign domain just because security reasons,
infact I can not modify or create cookie for othen site, not own.
But I think it is possible to READ cookie from other site. Just the user
set in own browser settings allow third party cookies.
How can do it in wicket?
I only know this instruction to read cookie, and in this I can not choose
the domain to use:
Cookie[] cookies =
((WebRequest)getRequestCycle().getRequest()).getCookies();
This is my test application:
=
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd;
html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;
xmlns:wicket=http://wicket.apache.org/; xml:lang=en lang=en
head
titleWicket cookie test/title
/head
body
a wicket:id=create_cookieCreate Cookie/a
br /br /br /
a wicket:id=read_cookieRead Cookie/a
/body
/html
==
package org.wicket.example;
import org.apache.wicket.markup.html.WebPage;
import org.apache.wicket.markup.html.link.Link;
import org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WebResponse;
import org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WebRequest;
import javax.servlet.http.Cookie;
public class TestPage extends WebPage {
/**
* Constructor
*/
public TestPage() {
}
@Override
protected void onInitialize() {
super.onInitialize();
add(new LinkTestPage(create_cookie) {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 6762033052623200948L;
@Override
public void onClick() {
((WebResponse) getResponse()).addCookie(createCookie());
setResponsePage(TestPage.class);
}
});
add(new LinkTestPage(read_cookie) {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 6762033052623200948L;
@Override
public void onClick() {
Cookie[] cookies =
((WebRequest)getRequestCycle().getRequest()).getCookies();
System.out.println(cookies[0].getName());
setResponsePage(TestPage.class);
}
});
}
/**
* Creates test cookie
* @return cookie
*/
public Cookie createCookie() {
Cookie cookie = new Cookie(wicketTest, 1);
// cookie.setDomain(.example.com);
cookie.setMaxAge(6000);
return cookie;
}
}
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: wicket-ajax.js header contribution with script that includes a less than character
Matthias: of course, reversing the options should be the easiest and most
obvious workaround. Thank you.
Pedro: I could try to escape the . Presumably this would be using its
entity lt; but it's not immediately obvious whether that would work because
of the various levels of encoding. The entire header contribution is in a
CDATA for the XHR so it would not get decoded there. I'm away from the
project at the moment but I will try this later.
Anyway, I will submit it as a bug and may be able to offer some insight into
the reason and possible fix. I suspect it has to do with crazy
(browser-specific) hoop jumping in wicket-ajax.js's processing of the ajax
response. That looks like a good bit of volatile code to make it work as
well as it does.
On Feb 3, 2011 4:18 AM, Matthias Gasser matthias.gas...@gmail.com wrote:
A time ago I faced a similar problem, but not with wicket...
I needed to escape the character somehow, or try to reverse the
arguments
like: 0 someVariable.
see http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193471seqNum=9
Am 03.02.2011 um 08:56 schrieb Randy S.:
Hi all. I have narrowed a problem down to the following scenario:
I have a panel with this:
wicket:head
script
if (someVariable 0) {
someVariable = 0;
}
/script
/wicket:head
This script fails to execute when the panel is loaded by ajax. If I
replace
the less than character with equals ==, then it executes (but of
course, this is not what I need).
I tested this in Firefox 4.0b10 and Chrome 8.
I have searched a lot for others facing this issue, and also tried to dig
through wicket-ajax.js, but it is time to ask here in case it is a known
issue.
I 'm sure I can put the code into a separate JS file as a workaround but
I
wanted to save another network hop. Another solution would be to embed
the
script in wicket:panel rather than wicket:head, but that has the
disadvantage of re-sending the script with the panel content when the
panel
is re-used on the same page.
Thanks for any help/info.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: wicket-ajax.js header contribution with script that includes a less than character
Thanks, Igor.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-3420
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.comwrote:
wicket should do this for you. please file a bug.
-igor
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Randy S. randypo...@gmail.com wrote:
Matthias: of course, reversing the options should be the easiest and most
obvious workaround. Thank you.
Pedro: I could try to escape the . Presumably this would be using its
entity lt; but it's not immediately obvious whether that would work
because
of the various levels of encoding. The entire header contribution is in a
CDATA for the XHR so it would not get decoded there. I'm away from the
project at the moment but I will try this later.
Anyway, I will submit it as a bug and may be able to offer some insight
into
the reason and possible fix. I suspect it has to do with crazy
(browser-specific) hoop jumping in wicket-ajax.js's processing of the
ajax
response. That looks like a good bit of volatile code to make it work as
well as it does.
On Feb 3, 2011 4:18 AM, Matthias Gasser matthias.gas...@gmail.com
wrote:
A time ago I faced a similar problem, but not with wicket...
I needed to escape the character somehow, or try to reverse the
arguments
like: 0 someVariable.
see http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193471seqNum=9
Am 03.02.2011 um 08:56 schrieb Randy S.:
Hi all. I have narrowed a problem down to the following scenario:
I have a panel with this:
wicket:head
script
if (someVariable 0) {
someVariable = 0;
}
/script
/wicket:head
This script fails to execute when the panel is loaded by ajax. If I
replace
the less than character with equals ==, then it executes (but of
course, this is not what I need).
I tested this in Firefox 4.0b10 and Chrome 8.
I have searched a lot for others facing this issue, and also tried to
dig
through wicket-ajax.js, but it is time to ask here in case it is a
known
issue.
I 'm sure I can put the code into a separate JS file as a workaround
but
I
wanted to save another network hop. Another solution would be to embed
the
script in wicket:panel rather than wicket:head, but that has the
disadvantage of re-sending the script with the panel content when the
panel
is re-used on the same page.
Thanks for any help/info.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
wicket-ajax.js header contribution with script that includes a less than character
Hi all. I have narrowed a problem down to the following scenario:
I have a panel with this:
wicket:head
script
if (someVariable 0) {
someVariable = 0;
}
/script
/wicket:head
This script fails to execute when the panel is loaded by ajax. If I replace
the less than character with equals ==, then it executes (but of
course, this is not what I need).
I tested this in Firefox 4.0b10 and Chrome 8.
I have searched a lot for others facing this issue, and also tried to dig
through wicket-ajax.js, but it is time to ask here in case it is a known
issue.
I 'm sure I can put the code into a separate JS file as a workaround but I
wanted to save another network hop. Another solution would be to embed the
script in wicket:panel rather than wicket:head, but that has the
disadvantage of re-sending the script with the panel content when the panel
is re-used on the same page.
Thanks for any help/info.
Re: Logout (Session destroy) on the last (stateful) page?
If that bookmarkable uri is a stateless page, will that prevent a new
session from being established? (Assuming the default session store is in
use)
On Dec 3, 2010 10:14 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
it is a good idea to always redirect to a bookmarkable url after
invalidating your session.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:08 AM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
e.g. you could:
1-Place and AbstractDefaultAjaxBehavior on you page (e.g. to some div
on your page). Use urlFor to generate the URL to this behavior. On
respond(AjaxRequestTarget target) {
Invalidate your session.
}
2-Make your page implement IHeaderContributor and on
public void renderHead(IHeaderResponse response) {
response.renderOnDomReadyJavascript(here use jquery AJAX
to call
URL of step 1);
}
Ernesto
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro
reier...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Matt,
I see. Then maybe adding some onDomReady javascript to
ConfirmationPage that simply goes back to the server and invalidates
the session? Probably this can't use wicket AJAX machinery: because
that will probably will also trigger a redirect.
Regards,
Ernesto
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Matthias Keller
matthias.kel...@ergon.ch wrote:
Hi Ernesto
No that's not possible because the ConfirmationPage is *stateful* and
contains lots of information from the session/page state, so it must be
allowed to display the pre-rendered page once but after that request,
the
session must be invalidated.
Thanks
Matt
On 2010-12-02 10:34, Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro wrote:
Matt,
Can't you just do some kind of trick so that your ConfirmationPage is
served as the home page? So that you invalidate the session but at
getHomePage() you temporarily return your ConfirmationPage?
Regards,
Ernesto
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Matthias Keller
matthias.kel...@ergon.ch wrote:
Hi Randy
Yes it appears to have something to do with that. Our app uses the
REDIRECT_BUFFER by default (we never actively configured this though)
which
appears to be a sensible option for normal operation. I'm not very
familiar
with the render strategies but you appear to be right: The page is
actually
rendered at the end of the previous request where the session is
invalidated
too. Then a redirect happens to the pre-rendered page which fails
because
the Session is already gone...
Is there any hook that will be called at the end of the second
request
serving the pre-rendered content?
I found a workaround for the moment: In the previous page, I
explicitly
set
setRedirect(false); but this has the consequence that if the user
hits
reload on the confirmation page, he will first be asked about
resending
the
POST parameters...
Anything we could do to invalidate the session at the end of the
serving
of
the prerendered page?
Thanks a lot
Matt
On 2010-12-01 20:44, Randy S. wrote:
Does the redirect to the home page happen because of Wicket's
default
render
strategy (REDIRECT_TO_BUFFER) that causes two requests? You
invalidate
session on the first which redirects to the buffered response. When
the
second request comes in expecting to get the already-rendered
response,
you
get a new session.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Martin Makundi
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.comwrote:
Hi!
I am curious too. For this reason we had to build our logoutpage so
that it invalidtes session logically but not in httpsession sense.
Only clicking something from login page will do that.
But it's a hack, I would like to know what's the proper way ;)
**
Martin
2010/12/1 Matthias Kellermatthias.kel...@ergon.ch:
Hi
I've got the following problem:
After a user completes a wizard, he sees a last confirmation page
containing
some data, thus it must be a stateful page called by the following
code
from
the wizard:
setResponsePage(new ConfirmationPage(myBean));
This ConfirmationPage must only be displayed once, thus if the
user
does
a
refresh it must not be available anymore.
I expected that I would be able to call session.invalidate() from
somewhere
within the ConfirmationPage's onAfterRender or onDetach methods.
Unfortunately, whenever I do this, the user is automatically
redirected
to
the home page without a trace in the logs
Any idea how to do that?
Thanks
Matt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Logout (Session destroy) on the last (stateful) page?
Does the redirect to the home page happen because of Wicket's default render strategy (REDIRECT_TO_BUFFER) that causes two requests? You invalidate session on the first which redirects to the buffered response. When the second request comes in expecting to get the already-rendered response, you get a new session. On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Martin Makundi martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com wrote: Hi! I am curious too. For this reason we had to build our logoutpage so that it invalidtes session logically but not in httpsession sense. Only clicking something from login page will do that. But it's a hack, I would like to know what's the proper way ;) ** Martin 2010/12/1 Matthias Keller matthias.kel...@ergon.ch: Hi I've got the following problem: After a user completes a wizard, he sees a last confirmation page containing some data, thus it must be a stateful page called by the following code from the wizard: setResponsePage(new ConfirmationPage(myBean)); This ConfirmationPage must only be displayed once, thus if the user does a refresh it must not be available anymore. I expected that I would be able to call session.invalidate() from somewhere within the ConfirmationPage's onAfterRender or onDetach methods. Unfortunately, whenever I do this, the user is automatically redirected to the home page without a trace in the logs Any idea how to do that? Thanks Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
RE: Wicket site on Android phone
A big advantage of the iphone browser is its ability to scroll an inner scrolling box (scrollable div or iframe, for example). It does this by handling a two-finger drag as scroll. I'm not aware of a way to do the same with the android browser. We also are facing demand for a desktop web app to be used on android so we are considering in some cases simplifying the UI to accommodate this. One example is bouncing to a different page rather than using a modal dialog for some interactions. Back on topic for Wicket, scrolling is the only barrier we have seen. Everything else works. For what it's worth, a lot of our ajax stuff is wiquery-based. On Oct 8, 2010 3:58 AM, Chris Colman chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com wrote: The Android market is going through spectacular growth at the moment. It's going bezerk! http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/10/05/the-rise-of-android-what-does-it- mean-for-apple-users/ The fact that it supports Flash and that its apps are written in Java instead of Objective C like the iPhone (last I heard of that language was in 1989!) made it extremely attractive to me but even without writing specific Android apps the fact that it has a proper browser means that wicket powered sites around the world will start to get visited, a lot, by yet another browser type. They've also found that Andtroid users, on average, pull down 25% more data per month on their iPhone cousins - apparently they're a lot more tech savvy crowd - less 'Angry Birds' and more ServerSide etc., Coming from Java world my knowledge of JavaScript is very limited so I don't know how helpful I'll be in debugging the Javascript as executed on a Webkit/Android browser. If anyone else out there has a wicket website and an Android phone I'd like to know if you experience some of the problem I did. It only appears to affect JavaScript - standard HTML form submission seems fine - as expected. - Chris -Original Message- From: Martin Grigorov [mailto:mgrigo...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, 8 October 2010 12:06 AM To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: Wicket site on Android phone I guess it is some WebKit related Javascript issues. Don't know how hard is to debug them but if you manage - send us a patch ;- ) On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Chris Colman chr...@stepaheadsoftware.comwrote: I've just picked up a new Android phone (HTC Desire - awesome phone BTW) and most of our wicket powered site works well. There are two issues which maybe just me not knowing how to use the phone properly or they may be issues with the Webkit based browser on those things: 1. I haven't been able to grab the caption on modal windows in order to drag them around on the screen. Being a 'touch' based paradigm maybe there is no such thing as a 'grab'. 2. Clicking the OK button on a modal window doesn't seem to have any effect - the modal stays open. I have only had the phone for a couple of days so the issues could be all me - not knowing how to perform the above operations - if anyone has some enlightenment, please let me know. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket in JBoss cluster
Isn't this caused by the storage of past pages in files on disk rather than in HTTP Session? This is in the default ISessionStore implementation (see SecondLevelCacheSessionStore, DiskPageStore). On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Jan Grathwohl jan.grathw...@googlemail.com wrote: Dear all, would you be so kind and share your experience about whether it is reasonable to use Wicket for app development in the following situation: We are planning to develop an application that will be deployed in our customer's portlet environment (JBoss Portal). There will be two clustered JBoss instances with JBoss's own session replication mechanism enabled. The main reason for the clustering is to have failover that should be transparent for logged in users, and this has to work really reliably. I don't know what the exact configuration of the load balancer and the JBoss servers will be, and how much influence we will have on it. Is it safe to use wicket in such a situation, or should we rather go for a more stateless framework? I did some tests to run a very simple Wicket app in two clustered JBoss instances, and after I shut down the instance with the active session, the session continues to be available on the other cluster node, and the links in the pages still work. So far, so good. But when I hit the browser's back button, I receive a Page Expired Error. This probably means that the content of the page store is not correctly replicated to the other cluster node? Is this a known limitation, or caused by some wrong configuration? Thanks for any feedback on these topics, please let me know what your experiences and opinions are. Kind regards, Jan
Re: Wicket in JBoss cluster
Are you saying that because HTTP Session will contain the last-displayed-page, a single back button after failover should have worked because the second server would have persisted that one page to its own disk? On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote: Yes. But wicket tries to store the page being sent across cluster during replication when the session is deserialized on target node. -Matej On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Randy S. randypo...@gmail.com wrote: Isn't this caused by the storage of past pages in files on disk rather than in HTTP Session? This is in the default ISessionStore implementation (see SecondLevelCacheSessionStore, DiskPageStore).
Re: Wicket in JBoss cluster
Oh I see. Thanks for the explanation. I can't comment on JBoss's session replication. I'm familiar with websphere with a DB-backed session which does not deserialize until it has to re-load from the DB, either because you bounced nodes or had the session expunged from memory due to the limit of in-memory sessions. On Oct 22, 2009 5:41 PM, Matej Knopp matej.kn...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite. On every request when page is changed and the session with page is replicated on cluster the receiving nodes should store the page to diskpagestore. This way every state of page should be saved. But this will only work if the container deserializes sessions immediately after replication. -Matej On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Randy S. randypo...@gmail.com wrote: Are you saying that beca... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-...
Re: Italian Bank (was Re: Wicket 1.4.2 Released!)
Thanks for the info, Giovanni. Please let us know of any Wicket apps released, especially if there is something we can check out without having accounts. (I don't live in Italy.) On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Giovanni pino_o...@yahoo.com wrote: The bank is Intesa San Paolo: http://www.group.intesasanpaolo.com
Italian Bank (was Re: Wicket 1.4.2 Released!)
Giovanni, What bank is this? What is the URL and is there anything of particular interest that we can see without accounts? On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 7:05 AM, Giovanni pino_o...@yahoo.com wrote: Wow!!! I will upgrade my project for a major italian bank on coming monday. Thanks a lot for all your efforts in developing this great web framework! Best regards, giovanni
Re: Complicated workflows
We are also trying to find the right balance of how much we move to declarative. It will depend on how well we get Web Flow to fit in. With Wicket being Controller-less and wanting to launch right into the home page, Web Flow is a clear candidate to do initial data load and logic to determine the first page. With Wicket out of the box, it seems that the app's home page would need to have this conditional logic which could include different panels or redirect depending on state. But that doesn't seem very elegant. Also, because we run in very large clusters, redirects are out of the question due to the potential that the second request hits a different server before HTTP session has been properly persisted/shared. On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Phil Housley undeconstruc...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/9/30 Randy S. randypo...@gmail.com: Have you thought about using Spring Web Flow for this? I'm not a SWF expert, but it sounds like something well-tailored to your needs. For example, a flow can have steps that don't have UIs. Our group at work is looking into Wicket SWF integration. I have a seen a few comments on the web from folks like Peter Thomas who conclude that you don't need to use SWF with Wicket. We need to externalize the flow of some applications so we have discussed shallow integration (where, for example, a button.onClick explicitly calls SWF to determine what to do next), as well as deep(er) integration (perhaps at the RequestCycleProcessor. At the moment, we are leaning toward the shallow/lightweight integration which gives lots of flexibility to each application to respond to a flow's response in different ways (show a new page, update components via Ajax, redirect to another URL, etc.). In case anyone is interested, reasons we need to externalize flow on some apps are things like: Complex business rules, business unit authoring of flow (via a controlled UI), and delegation to a business process manager layer. Actually, I hadn't realised that WebFlow wasn't limited to Spring MVC. Looking at it now, I am doing something fairly similar, so I probably ought to take a longer look... The reasons I started on this thing with code rather than going totally declarative is that my current experience is that there will be sufficient corner cases to make it necessary to regularly subclass actions or panels for a particular instance. Where that isn't required, I was thinking that a Spring context file would provide a nice declarative way of configuring everything, with prototype scope beans etc being well fitted to creating tasks. Despite all that, I don't particularly want a hard dependency on anything other than Wicket, so plain Java first, other things hopefully on top. Phil On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Phil Housley undeconstruc...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, I'm currently working on some ideas for building apps with fairly complex workflows. My aim is to find a nice pattern/framework for building apps where each unit of work involves many panels, several forms, lots of decisions and so on. In particular I'm aiming at apps where you need to be very confident about exactly what is happening, so very strict control of actions, being careful of multiple renderings of a page each trying to change the server data, and so on. Also, I'm wondering about some options for declarative building of workflows out of existing tasks. My current design involves running from a special page, which maintains a stack of tasks. One type of task is a Workflow, which can be configured to automatically spawn subtasks as required, based on the result of previous tasks. Another type of task is based on a panel, and is able to cause itself to be rendered. The stack processor makes sure that each task is invoked at the right time, that a task can render if it is at the top of the stack, that only the top of the stack can be invoked from a form and so on. This is working ok for some silly demo cases, but there are various issues. For example, any task that is not also a component cannot access dependency injection, or set error messages and so on. I'm not sure how to get around this at the moment, as I don't want to force every task to be a component, when many will likely have no cause to ever be rendered. So, the reason I'm posting is to ask mainly two things: 1) Is this of interest to anyone else? All the code is my own, so I'll open source it if there seems to be some future in it. 2) If so, does anyone have any comments on my current design? Clearly there are problems with it, but should I carry on trying to find ways to work around them, or does the whole thing sounds like so much crack? Thanks, -- Phil Housley - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional
Re: RE: Complicated workflows
We use server affinity but you can't guarantee same server and I can't go in with a 100% plan. We have had funny routing in some cases where requests from the same user even bounce from one data center to another... and back. We've done a lot of work to prevent these things but in the end it's never guaranteed. On the other hand, the chances of two back-to-back requests (as in the case of a redirect) being routed to the same node are extremely high. On Sep 30, 2009 9:58 PM, Chris Colman chr...@stepaheadsoftware.com wrote: Also, because we run in very large clusters, redirects are out of the question due to the potent... Can't you set up server affinity for the cluster to avoid that from occurring? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users...
Re: Complicated workflows
Have you thought about using Spring Web Flow for this? I'm not a SWF expert, but it sounds like something well-tailored to your needs. For example, a flow can have steps that don't have UIs. Our group at work is looking into Wicket SWF integration. I have a seen a few comments on the web from folks like Peter Thomas who conclude that you don't need to use SWF with Wicket. We need to externalize the flow of some applications so we have discussed shallow integration (where, for example, a button.onClick explicitly calls SWF to determine what to do next), as well as deep(er) integration (perhaps at the RequestCycleProcessor. At the moment, we are leaning toward the shallow/lightweight integration which gives lots of flexibility to each application to respond to a flow's response in different ways (show a new page, update components via Ajax, redirect to another URL, etc.). In case anyone is interested, reasons we need to externalize flow on some apps are things like: Complex business rules, business unit authoring of flow (via a controlled UI), and delegation to a business process manager layer. On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Phil Housley undeconstruc...@gmail.comwrote: Hello list, I'm currently working on some ideas for building apps with fairly complex workflows. My aim is to find a nice pattern/framework for building apps where each unit of work involves many panels, several forms, lots of decisions and so on. In particular I'm aiming at apps where you need to be very confident about exactly what is happening, so very strict control of actions, being careful of multiple renderings of a page each trying to change the server data, and so on. Also, I'm wondering about some options for declarative building of workflows out of existing tasks. My current design involves running from a special page, which maintains a stack of tasks. One type of task is a Workflow, which can be configured to automatically spawn subtasks as required, based on the result of previous tasks. Another type of task is based on a panel, and is able to cause itself to be rendered. The stack processor makes sure that each task is invoked at the right time, that a task can render if it is at the top of the stack, that only the top of the stack can be invoked from a form and so on. This is working ok for some silly demo cases, but there are various issues. For example, any task that is not also a component cannot access dependency injection, or set error messages and so on. I'm not sure how to get around this at the moment, as I don't want to force every task to be a component, when many will likely have no cause to ever be rendered. So, the reason I'm posting is to ask mainly two things: 1) Is this of interest to anyone else? All the code is my own, so I'll open source it if there seems to be some future in it. 2) If so, does anyone have any comments on my current design? Clearly there are problems with it, but should I carry on trying to find ways to work around them, or does the whole thing sounds like so much crack? Thanks, -- Phil Housley - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Large internet rich UI Wicket websites?
For what it's worth, my employer is a large financial services organization and we are considering switching to Wicket for all our major internal and external development. I also have been disappointed while going through the Wiki page that lists sites using Wicket. Many are not even in existence anymore, and I saw no high volume sites. This is not a complaint to anyone. Wicket is what it is, including the community. My point is that despite the lack of (advertised) usage on high volume sites, some of us are lurking and see lots of potential. On Jul 2, 2009 2:16 PM, David Chang david_q_zh...@yahoo.com wrote: Igor, thanks very much for your input and insight. I really mean it. All the best. --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Large internet rich UI Wicket websites? To: users@wicket.apache.org Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 2:35 PM lets say the entire backend of amazon is written in wicket. would you consider that to be a la...
Re: Wicket pages as plugin
Hi all. I am evaluating Wicket for our company and also have the same question. There are cases when iframes work just fine (even better), but other cases when an in-DOM solution is needed. For example, if the app needs to display something like a fly-out or simulated pop-up outside the screen space of the app, the boundary of the iframe prevents such UI elements from going outside the iframe. Naturally, apps running in such a way would have constraints because they're sharing the DOM, JS and CSS with other apps (e.g., like a portal page). But it would add flexibility to Wicket. -Randy S. On Mar 3, 2009 7:49 AM, Sébastien Piller pi...@hmcrecord.ch wrote: We use iframes for that. It works quite well. Stefan Lindner wrote: Dear wicket users and wizzards! Is ist possible to use wicket to imp...
Re: Wicket pages as plugin
Thanks Igor. I guess the trick would be knowing what is safe to filter out without breaking Wicket. I'll look into this filter. On Mar 3, 2009 5:15 PM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote: you can use iresponsefilter to strip whatever you want from the generated html. -igor On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Randy S. randypo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all. I am evaluating Wi... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-...
