Why not have your action views be pages (guessing they are components now), as they are the main content holders right? And then have the surrounding menu/tabs being components in a Border type element? I don't think you would really loose anything here, and you don't have to include everything on one page.
-Nick On 6/16/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It looks like Tapestry really doesn't like not having components declared at > deployment-time. So, we have had to declare all views in one template file > and based on a whether a view has been selected that component skips its > pageBeginRender method. Otherwise, all components go through a > pageBeginRender process, even though they are not being actually rendered. > The framework doesn't seem to care. > > I cannot believe that the framework doesn't allow adding components to a > page during run-time. I find that very inflexible. > > We have to be able to support "actions" from a navigation tree on the left > and build these actions as tabbed views on the right main content. So, how > do you suppose this can be done without declaring all possible view > components in the right content template? > > Thanks, > Ozzie G > > -----Original Message----- > From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 6:11 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Programmatically adding a component to a page at runtim > > There were a few threads about this. You should not do this, because > pages should be static. According to Howard, this might work in a > developing enviourenment. On Production you will get problems, because > of how Tapestry Caches pages. > > There are two alternatives. Either use conditional rendering > (@Conditional) or delegate the rendering to a java class: instead of > adding a component, your component calls a render method on an custom > class, passing the writer... > > Cheers, > Ron > > > ציטוט [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > I would like to be able to add (switch out) components to a page during > > runtime. I have seen a few examples on the web, however, they fall short > in > > binding persistent properties of the newly added component. After > examining > > the PageLoader class, it looks like most of the methods are private or > > protected and don't allow one to mimick its operation programmatically. Is > > there anyone out there who has successfully added a component during > runtime > > to a page and gotten the persistent properties to work? This seems to me > > like a very important feature missing from the framework, unless I am > > totally missing it. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ozzie Gurkan > > > > Integrated Systems Manager > > > > Emerson Retail Services > > > > Tel: 678-631-1925 > > > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
