If you need this to work the way you are describing, I would use a hidden field (that matches your form) valued at either 'true' or 'false' and use javascript to link up a checkbox to 1) set the checkbox initial value; 2) toggle the hidden field when the checkbox is toggled; and 3) loose the reset. If you use boolean getters and setters you don't have to worry about coding in the words true and false on the java side.
Edgar > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 10:35 PM > To: 'Struts Users Mailing List' > Subject: RE: checkboxes - ActionForm in session scope > > > <snip> > I call reset method selectively since I am trying to develope > wizard style pages with one form. </snip> > > Ah, but if you dont reset the checkbox it will always stay > ticked - as nothing (not even an empty string!) is submitted > for an unticked checkbox so the forms setter method is never called. > > THIS is the real reason the reset() method even exists in the > first place - its a workaround for this flaw in the html > spec. Other fields that need to be reset include > multiple-select boxes and textareas. Empty input fields will > submit an empty string so they dont need to be reset, and > single selects always have something selected so dont need it either. > > If your doing wizards you should still call reset() but you > do the selective stuff inside the code for the reset() method > (such that it resets only those fields that were visible on > the page just submitted). > > -----Original Message----- > From: Khalid K. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 16 July 2003 01:54 > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: checkboxes - ActionForm in session scope > > > Hello All, > > I have the following problem, and any help is greatly appreciated: > > 1. html form that has a checkbox which is associated with a > Action Form Bean - boolean attribute 2. ActionForm is in > session scope 3. I call reset method selectively since I am > trying to develope wizard style pages with one form. 4. using > struts 1.0.2 > > problem: > > When I check a checkbox and submit the form, on the > "pending" page, I see the value as set to "true" which is OK. > > Now, When I click on "modify" which takes me to the html with > the form, and I uncheck the checkbox and submit again....the > value on the "pending" page is still set to TRUE. Which it > should be set to FALSE. any ideas ?? > > Khalid > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John M. Corro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 10:48 AM > Subject: Re: Is this really the best way to handle this problem > > > > I've seen two ways of dealing w/ this problem, both of > which I see as > 'hackish' > > in nature. > > > > Solution A: > > > > In your getters/setters you implement the following code > > > > public MyCustomBean getMyCustomBean(int index) { > > while(index >= myCustomBeanList.size()) { > > myCustomBeanList.add(new MyCustomBean()); > > } > > return (MyCustomBean)myCustomBeanList.get(index); > > } > > > > In that way you'll never encounter the common > > IndexOutOfBoundsException. > The > > problem here is that you tend to use alot of hidden fields > in your UI > > to > repopulate > > the data back into the dynamically created beans. > > > > Solution B: > > > > In your reset() method you repopulate your internal Collection of > > beans. > The > > problem w/ this approach is that often times you have a separate > > Action > that > > prepopulates your ActionForm. This provides for good > separation - the > Action > > is a retriever of a data (nothing more) and the ActionForm > is merely a > container > > for data (nothing more). With this approach your > ActionForm suddenly > starts > > becoming more intelligent than it really should be. Now > it's aware of > > how > to > > populate itself...not a good thing IMO. > > > > I'd be very interested in hearing other solutions to this > problem as I > find > > both of the above solutions cumbersome and hackish and > would love to > > stop > implementing > > them. > > > > >I've been struggling with a problem similar to the one > described (and > > >solved) at > > > >http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg50901.h > > >tml > . > > > > >Is this really the recommended way to solve population / > repopulation > > >of properties stored in a List() of > > >whatever-data-object-i-need-in-the-form-of-a-bean ? Is > there a better > > >way > to > > > > >acheive the same result ? (I.e represent a collection in a form) > > > > > >I've read that a practice often used to represent collections (a > > >DB-table for intstance) is to make a bean that has getters > / setters > > >for the properties of a single row and then have the ActionForm > > >contain a List() > of > > > > >those beans. One for every row (in the DB-example). That far I can > follow, > > > > >and see how / why. But is there no better way to update > the values in > > >the ActionForm (beans) when the data is submitted than in the URL > > >above ? > > > > > >//Linus Nikander - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John M. Corro > > Cornerstone Consulting > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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]
