Re: [jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] Implement "hidden" attribute for composite tags (spec rev A)
by Leonardo Uribe
Hi
This is a message on behalf of Jakob Korherr:
".....Working on this issue I found out that the hidden property can not be
added for composite:actionSource, composite:editableValueHolder and
composite:valueHolder, because those tags do not create a
java.beans.FeatureDescriptor, but a javax.faces.view.AttachedObjectTarget
and this one does not include a hidden property. Thus this clearly is a spec
issue...."
On myfaces we don't see how this attribute should work. The description
says:
"....The "hidden" flag is used to identify features that are intended only
for tool use, and which should not be exposed to humans....."
It has sense on composite:attribute, composite:facet and
composite:interface, but it doesn't on composite:actionSource,
composite:editableValueHolder and composite:valueHolder.
regards,
Leonardo Uribe
14 years, 8 months
Re: [jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] [ADMIN] Expert Community meeting 20100707 13:00 EDT
by Edward Burns
Hello Team,
I'm writing to correct the conference call login credentials.
EB> I would like to have a meeting of our expert community to go over our
[...]
EB> Here is the call in information for the meeting.
EB> Vienna Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at 7:00:00 PM UTC+2 hours CEST
EB> (Austria)
EB> London Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at 6:00:00 PM UTC+1 hour BST
EB> (U.K. - England)
EB> New York Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at 1:00:00 PM UTC-4 hours EDT
EB> (U.S.A. - New York)
EB> San Francisco Wednesday, July 7, 2010 at 10:00:00 AM UTC-7 hours PDT
EB> (U.S.A. - California)
EB> Toll Free US access number
EB> 1 866 682 4770
This number is correct.
EB> Conference Code: 7824109
This number is incorrect. The correct number is 7821409. I transposed
1 and 4.
EB> Password: 7824109
This number is incorrect. The correct number is 1409.
Other than that, I'll talk to you soon!
Ed
14 years, 8 months
Re: [jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] CDI constructor integration
by Ed Burns
>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:42:03 -0400, Stephen Kenna <kenna(a)us.ibm.com> said:
SK> We did some testing on Glassfish, and not only did constructor injection
SK> not occur, but field injection did not occur either. (Field injection is
SK> working on JBoss)
Did you try putting the @Inject annotation on the field itself (not the
setter) and also putting the @javax.faces.bean.ManagedProperty
annotation on the field?
>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 08:26:32 -0700, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> said:
SK> and we also need to support constructor injection
PM> I'm pretty [sure] you don't. The @ManagedBean which causes the JSF
PM> managed bean container to get involved is *different* to the
PM> @ManagedBean which the EE spec indicates should support
PM> (javax.faces.bean.ManagedBean vs javax.annotation.Managed[Bean] -
PM> and yes, IMO this is a crazy divergence, and we did argue against
PM> it).
This decision was driven by platform adoption more than anything else.
I decided it was important to support improverished (CDI-bereft)
containers like Tomcat 6 for JSF 2.0.
PM> Using this logic, there is *no way* for a managed bean which
PM> lives in the JSF managed bean container to become a managed bean as
PM> defined by EE.5.20, and thus support ctor injection. So, JSF managed
PM> beans are just required to support field injection.
PM> This is what we check in the CDI TCK.
PM> If you think about it, this makes sense. If you are in a CDI enabled
PM> bean archive, then why would you be using JSF managed beans. If you
PM> aren't in a CDI enabled bean archive, ctor injection is certainly
PM> not required.
Stephen, is this ok with you?
Ed
--
| edburns(a)oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/
| 13 Work Days Til JSF 2.1 Milestone 1
14 years, 8 months
[jsr-314-open-mirror] [jsr-314-open] Ajax inside a DataTable
by Cagatay Civici
Hi,
I've faced with an issue in our app I'd like to share when trying to update the datatable itself from a command element located inside a column. Case is to select a row, execute logic and update the datatable. Basic code:
<h:dataTable id="cars" var="car" value="#{tableBean.carsSmall}">
<h:column>
<f:facet name="header">
Model
</f:facet>
<h:outputText value="#{car.model}" />
</h:column>
<h:column>
<f:facet name="header">
Action
</f:facet>
<h:commandButton value="Some Action" actionListener="#{tableBean.handleRowAction(car)}">
<f:ajax render="cars" />
</h:commandButton>
</h:column>
</h:dataTable>
As datatable has a rowIndex >= 0 during rendering of commandButton f:ajax defines the component id to render as cars:{rowIndex} where I should expect "cars" only. This is due to UIData.getClientId implementation as UIData
adds rowIndex for unique row ids. This causes an issue with a nested f:ajax case.
Regards,
Cagatay Civici
14 years, 8 months