Fragments would allow you to have different markup and markup hierarchy for
each DDC option in case the entity attributes were different.
LazyBoy wrote:
>
> Yes, a different EM for each DDC option.
>
> Replacing the form's model is working.
> Replacing the form's modelObject worked before that.
> I'm just trying to understand what the best current practice is.
>
> What would the advantage of fragments be?
> Creating the fragment on selection or maintaining N fragments?
>
> -troy
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:56 PM, bferr<b...@juno.com> wrote:
>>
>> It sounds like you have different entitiy models for each DDC option
>> right?
>> That's why you are replacing the model of the form each time?
>>
>> I think you could try creating a fragment for each DDC option and each
>> fragment would have it's own model. Then replace the fragment inside the
>> form when the DDC is changed and the "enclosing CPM" would be the one on
>> the
>> fragment and not the one on the form.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> LazyBoy wrote:
>>>
>>> I have the following password confirmation pattern borrowed from WIA
>>>
>>> PasswordTextField p1 = new
>>> PasswordTextField("password").setResetPassword(false);
>>> docForm.add(p1);
>>> PasswordTextField p2 = new
>>> PasswordTextField("repeatPassword").setResetPassword(false);
>>> --> p2.setModel(p1.getModel());
>>> docForm.add(p2);
>>> docForm.add(new EqualPasswordInputValidator(p1, p2));
>>>
>>> in a form that gets reused (repetitively in the same page). This used
>>> to work fine
>>> with a CPM and calling docForm.setModelObject().
>>>
>>> I rewrote to pass models instead of objects, changing
>>> docForm.setModelObject() to
>>> docForm.setModel(new CPM(new EntityModel(...)))
>>>
>>> and got
>>> "No get method defined for class: ... expression: repeatPassword"
>>> But the other fields work fine, if I comment out the
>>> repeatPasswordField.
>>> (My underlying data object has never had a repeatPassword field.)
>>>
>>> It works if I call
>>> cpm.setChainedModel(new EntityModel(....));
>>>
>>> instead, but that seems a little non-obvious. I imagine redoing the
>>> p2.setModel(p1.getModel() would work too.
>>>
>>> Q1. Is the setChainedModel() call the best solution for this case?
>>> Q2. It's a good thing to pass models, right? LDM's don't support
>>> setObject().
>>> Q3. In general (not this case), for reusing forms with CPM(EntityM)
>>> should I
>>> replace the CPM or only the EntityM ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -troy
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Changing-a-Form%27s-Model-tp24883888p24922623.html
>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Changing-a-Form%27s-Model-tp24883888p24943857.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
