we are aware of this and are working on a solution.the problem is that repeaters (listview, dataview, etc) introduce a problem for our markup resolution because the componet path contains the index which is a synthetic id and is not present in the markup.
we need to figure out a clean way to know
Any examples on the usage of wicket.markup.transformer? Yes i can read the javadocs but it would be of great help if somebody could explain this with a simple example. When am i likely to need this? I can take it up from there by reading the source code.
thanks,karthik
i don't know what goes wrong. In the forminput example we have also a ListMultipleChoice and that one is working fineCan you just look what goes wrong just set a breakpoint in ListMultipleChoice.updateModel()and see why the Collection selectedValues = (Collection)getModelObject(); is not filled
Transformers are used to post process components after they have been rendered. For instance, the XsltTransformerBehavior is used to apply a stylesheet to the rendered markup of a component. I have been using this with some success to generate _javascript_ from xml, but there are probably a
Hello,
The component model of Wicket makes it /very/ easy to create
application specific components, which enable reuse to the max. Today
I created a form component that is Hibernate optimistic locking aware
with about (give or take) 20 lines of code. All my collegues need to
do now is to
Sure, buy the book ;-)
Seriously, I'll see when I get around to writing a blog entry on the
subject, or a wiki article.
Problem is time: I desperately want my third chapter to ship to our
editor this weekend and I want to release a huge number of projects as
snapshots over the weekend (all the
Johan Compagner schrieb:
We have now a Security framework (better said security interfaces) inside
wicket.
I was wondering whether this is really a good idea. Isn't authorization
a responsibility of the model in a MVC application?
Timo
wicket is not MVC so the design of your application will be different. what we provide are hooks for you to build on, if you dont want to use them you dont have to. that is the beauty of the design: they are there for you if you need them, and invisible if you dont.
-IgorOn 2/11/06, Timo Stamm
Igor Vaynberg schrieb:
wicket is not MVC so the design of your application will be different.
I think a lot of people take wicket for a MVC framework, but let's not
have yet another discussion about what MVC is.
Since wicket propagates seperation of concerns (and it has a very good
most of the time you want security over pages or links (rendered/shown or not)It should be easy to integrate a signin page and so on.that should be possible in wicket. And that is what the security interfaces (and an example implemention) is for
just to provide hooks to do those things.Most people
Johan Compagner schrieb:
most of the time you want security over pages or links (rendered/shown or
not)
This can be very elegantly solved with an application model. For
example, a navigation provider should only return navigation items the
user has access to.
As for other links/buttons
I would like to put it a bit differently. Actually I think wicket is
more MVC than frameworks like struts are because we have the MVC at
the level of components instead of requests.
But to answer your question: yes it is a good idea to have such a
framework, even if you want to make authorization
Signin is part of the authentication (not authorization), and I concur
that a web framework should provide hooks for it.
Heh :) Don't agree. Authentication should be seen as part of
authorization. Authorization is the end-means of seeing whether action
x is permitted or not. Authentication is
Eelco Hillenius schrieb:
I would like to put it a bit differently. Actually I think wicket is
more MVC than frameworks like struts are because we have the MVC at
the level of components instead of requests.
But to answer your question: yes it is a good idea to have such a
framework, even if you
Eelco Hillenius schrieb:
Signin is part of the authentication (not authorization), and I concur
that a web framework should provide hooks for it.
Heh :) Don't agree. Authentication should be seen as part of
authorization. Authorization is the end-means of seeing whether action
x is permitted
any way you look at it wicket is where requests originate. so wicket is
the first layer of request processing. some people feel comfortable
determining authorization as soon as possible. that means either in
wicket, or in some filter over wicket servlet. why should we limit
those people?
also
unless you are stepping up and
saying that your design is the best for every situation out there
I don't know which one yet, but mine is best! ;)
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?
Hi folks,
Timothy Bennett and I have been thinking about how to hook Guardian
(http://guardian.safehaus.org), a simple authorization API into Wicket
so we can *declaratively* control the visibility of components on
pages. More complex interactions though where you alert the user about
their
Sounds nice!
The first thing you should look at is the interface
IAuthorizationStrategy. Then, look at wicket-auth-roles and
wicket-auth-roles-examples. This is a basic example implementation,
based on annotations and the metadata facility we've silently had in
Wicket for some time. They are
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Sounds nice!
Thanks for the rapid response.
The first thing you should look at is the interface
IAuthorizationStrategy. Then, look at wicket-auth-roles and
wicket-auth-roles-examples.
This is a basic example implementation,
based on annotations and the metadata
I've got a case where I need to display an image dynamically based on
a test in a row of data. I'm experimenting w/ the Image class but am
at a loss as to what to do next and cannot find any example code or
documentation.
Here's a snippet where I'm adding the Image based on a condition:
so what you want is to have an img tag that has an actual path.
Image component is made more for working with resources. what you want
can be accomplished like this:
instead of using the Image component add a WebMarkupContainer - this is a generic component.
then to setup the path add an
Just what I need...however...I'm getting an error that there is no
SimpleAttributeModifier and all I can find in the API docs is
AttributeModifier...no SimpleAttributeModifier.
I'm using 1.1.1 BTW, does that make a difference?
On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 23:30 -0800, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
so what you
Yeah, SimpleAttributeModifier is 1.2. In 1.1.1 there is
AttributeModifier which works fine too, but is a little bit more
verbose to use.
Eelco
On 2/11/06, V. Jenks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just what I need...however...I'm getting an error that there is no
SimpleAttributeModifier and all I can
24 matches
Mail list logo
