Just off of the top of my head I would probably use a collection or map of name/values... so the tag might look something like:
<s:textfield name="pairs[fieldId].fieldName"/> <s:textfield name="pairs[fieldId].fieldValue"/> etc. (with minor syntax changes depending on how things are shuffled to the JSP). d. --- Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The main part I'm having trouble with is keeping the > association between the > editable field name and the editable value, so if we > start with > > Phone1 : 555-12345 > > And the user changes the field name and value to be > > Fax : 555-12346 > > Getting the action to recognise that it should > update the both values. > > This is part of porting an app to s2, and currently > it's don using two input > fields which include an id, so it's basically > > <input type="text" name="fieldname_<%=fieldId%>" > value="phone1"> > <input type="text" name="fieldvalue_<%=fieldId%>" > value="555-12345"> > > Currently the servlet taking the input goes through > the servlet request > parameter map and when it finds a request parameter > that starts with > fieldname_ it gets the corresponding fieldvalue_ > entry and updates the field > record with the id. > > If there is a nice way I'd appreciate a pointer > because at the moment it > looks like we're going to have to use the same > method of going through the > parameter map which feels like it's a bit of a hack > and makes unit testing a > bit more tricky. > > Al. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Newton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 16 May 2007 18:19 > To: Struts Users Mailing List > Subject: RE: [Fwd: Best method for dynamic fields > round trip] > > --- Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's just what I was looking for, thanks Dave. I > was looking for a > > way to do it with <s:xxx/> tags, > so > > I'm now more confident it's best done without them > as opposed to > > thinking I might have missed something. > > Well, I'm just one opinion :) > > It could still be done with the S2 tags if, say, you > had a map of dynamic > parameter names (or ids, etc.) and iterate over the > map etc. > > It may depend more on how the dynamic parameters are > defined or declared, > etc. I think either way is acceptable, though (the > map idea might be easier > in some ways)... it just depends. > > d. > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ________You snooze, you lose. Get messages ASAP with > AutoCheck in the > all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_html.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] > > ____________________________________________________________________________________Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
