Yea Action. Ok Thanks.
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Dan Haywood <[email protected]>wrote: > When you say methods, I think you mean what Isis calls actions (as opposed > to the getter/setter methods that represent properties and collections). > > If so, the yes. > > Use the Identifier.Type enum to distinguish which sort of member > (property/collection/action) you are protecting. > > Or, if you want more fine-grained control, use the regular disableXxx() for > each 'xxx' member, eg: > > public String getFirstName() { ... } > public void setFirstName(String fn) { ... } > public String disableFirstName() { return owner()? null: "oh no you > don't!"; } > > private boolean owner() { return > getCreatedBy().equals(container.getUserName()); > > > Dan > > > > On 15 October 2013 17:53, james agada <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thanks. If I had methods, will this also apply to them ie I have a method > > like "Process" that appears on the menu when the entity is shown. Can I > use > > the same approach to disable it? > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Dan Haywood > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > something like: > > > > > > public class SomeClass { > > > > > > private String createdBy; > > > ... > > > > > > public String disabled(Identifier.Type type) { > > > return createdBy.equals(container.getUserName())? null: "Only > the > > > creator can modify this object"; > > > } > > > } > > > > > > HTH > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > On 15 October 2013 17:01, james agada <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I want to allow only the creator of a record to be the one able to do > > it. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > > > > >
