You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com> on 2002/06/20 18:37:15 UTC
Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Just curious as to the applicability of the Errors an Messages tags in
the nested context...
Because the nested tags use the one bean reference, I'm finding it hard
to visualise using these tags within context. In the original tags,
everything was an island, so it was all fine, but nesting against the
one bean makes it a little fuzzy.
Referencing the different bean means implanting a new root tag, which
would mean you'd have to nest the tags all over again to get to the same
point. It would be easier to go the route of the original
errors/messages tags.
I realise that it'd be really handy to be able to get at the same
property that a text box is working off of, but the separate bean issue
meant that I basically put it down to being out of context and as a
result I didn't include them in the tags when I first wrote them.
One way I can see it working is to make a small departure from the way
the rest of the nested tags work, and allow the referencing of a
different bean.
This then raises the problem that if you do it for one, you should
possibly allow the others. Not impossible. Just a check in the tags to
see if there's a supplied bean name reference, if there is, allow it to
go through.
Up to this point I kept it as a "best practice" to leave the naming of
any bean up to the root tag (well, it enforced it really).
Means that the requirement of the root tag should probably be loosened
up if a bean is explicitly provided. There will possibly be an ambiguity
as to how far back the property will be calculated, and the definition
of the nested tags being "properly marked up". But I'm probably
over-thinking the issue.
Any other thoughts?... any other committers actually using the nested
tags?... :)
Arron.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Posted by David Winterfeldt <dw...@yahoo.com>.
cool.
--- Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com> wrote:
> > The 'nameList.value' is being used to lookup of
> the
> > messages/errors that were stored under this in the
> > ActionMessages. ActionMessages has an internal
> Map
> > and uses a key (normally the property name and
> there
> > is also GLOBAL_MESSAGE constant) to store
> > messages/errors associated with that field.
>
>
> That part's not the problem.
>
>
> > > Internally the name is being set to the
> > > same as the rest of the tags, is this simply
> being
> > > ignored to go fetch
> > > the messages on a standard name?...
> >
> > Could you clarify this part? Or were you asking
> if
> > there was a different between passing in
> > 'nameList.value' or a simple property 'value'.
>
>
> On all the tags which take a name attribute to get
> at the bean, they
> extend the NestedNameSupport. So internally they'll
> get their name
> attribute set, like it or not even if a name was
> provided it will be
> ignored, as they all need to rely on the model the
> parent tags and such
> are working off. Reading the messages tag docco, it
> reads like the name
> attribute has to be set, so I assumed the
> NestedNameSupport.
>
> Having a closer look through it all, it resolves
> itself nicely. You've
> used the NestedPropertySupport which means that the
> name will not be
> set, and it will use the default ActionMessages
> reference. It does
> reference a different bean, but it's hidden and
> internal so that's all
> ok.
>
> If people provide the name attribute, it's all going
> fall over if the
> nested property isn't there, but that's kind of
> outside the nested scope
> and the original tag should be used.
>
>
> My confusion was that it was working off a different
> bean reference,
> which kind of impossible with the other nested tags
> without setting a
> new root tag. So I was also thinking about allowing
> people to reference
> a separate bean as standard functionality, as these
> message tags would
> be. I don't think they should, but I can hold off on
> this choice for
> now.
>
> Result, it's all good. Sorry about any confusions.
>
>
> Arron.
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Posted by Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com>.
> The 'nameList.value' is being used to lookup of the
> messages/errors that were stored under this in the
> ActionMessages. ActionMessages has an internal Map
> and uses a key (normally the property name and there
> is also GLOBAL_MESSAGE constant) to store
> messages/errors associated with that field.
That part's not the problem.
> > Internally the name is being set to the
> > same as the rest of the tags, is this simply being
> > ignored to go fetch
> > the messages on a standard name?...
>
> Could you clarify this part? Or were you asking if
> there was a different between passing in
> 'nameList.value' or a simple property 'value'.
On all the tags which take a name attribute to get at the bean, they
extend the NestedNameSupport. So internally they'll get their name
attribute set, like it or not even if a name was provided it will be
ignored, as they all need to rely on the model the parent tags and such
are working off. Reading the messages tag docco, it reads like the name
attribute has to be set, so I assumed the NestedNameSupport.
Having a closer look through it all, it resolves itself nicely. You've
used the NestedPropertySupport which means that the name will not be
set, and it will use the default ActionMessages reference. It does
reference a different bean, but it's hidden and internal so that's all
ok.
If people provide the name attribute, it's all going fall over if the
nested property isn't there, but that's kind of outside the nested scope
and the original tag should be used.
My confusion was that it was working off a different bean reference,
which kind of impossible with the other nested tags without setting a
new root tag. So I was also thinking about allowing people to reference
a separate bean as standard functionality, as these message tags would
be. I don't think they should, but I can hold off on this choice for
now.
Result, it's all good. Sorry about any confusions.
Arron.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Posted by David Winterfeldt <dw...@yahoo.com>.
The 'nameList.value' is being used to lookup of the
messages/errors that were stored under this in the
ActionMessages. ActionMessages has an internal Map
and uses a key (normally the property name and there
is also GLOBAL_MESSAGE constant) to store
messages/errors associated with that field.
> Internally the name is being set to the
> same as the rest of the tags, is this simply being
> ignored to go fetch
> the messages on a standard name?...
Could you clarify this part? Or were you asking if
there was a different between passing in
'nameList.value' or a simple property 'value'.
David
--- Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com> wrote:
> That all seems cool, and if the test works, all the
> better :)
>
> To confirm what's happening there...
> It's fetching the "nameList.value" property off the
> same bean as the
> text fields. To read the markup, the messages and
> errors would then be
> calling on the same property. Internally the name is
> being set to the
> same as the rest of the tags, is this simply being
> ignored to go fetch
> the messages on a standard name?...
>
> Arron.
>
> On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 05:45, David Winterfeldt
> wrote:
> > I'm not 100% I'm sure I'm following what the
> problem
> > is (probably missed some other e-mails). I was
> going
> > to talk to you Aaron when I went to do these, but
> it
> > seemed very simple so I went ahead and made them.
> I
> > just wanted the nested messages and errors tags to
> be
> > able to get the property name of the bean so you
> could
> > display messages and errors next to a field from a
> > list. These tags don't really need any other
> feature
> > the nested tags provid. Currently the validator
> can
> > handle lists, but not custom messages for each
> field.
> > It does correctly create the full property as the
> > error key though so you can display the error next
> to
> > the field. Here is the example from
> > web/validator/type.jsp where I tested this.
> >
> > <nested:iterate property="nameList">
> > <tr>
> > <th align="left">
> >
> > </th>
> > <td align="left">
> > <nested:messagesPresent property="value">
> > <br>
> > <ul>
> > <nested:messages id="error"
> > property="value">
> > <li><bean:write
> name="error"/></li>
> > </nested:messages>
> > </ul>
> > </nested:messagesPresent>
> >
> > <nested:text property="value" size="15"
> > maxlength="15"/>
> > </td>
> > </tr>
> > </nested:iterate>
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > David
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Posted by Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com>.
That all seems cool, and if the test works, all the better :)
To confirm what's happening there...
It's fetching the "nameList.value" property off the same bean as the
text fields. To read the markup, the messages and errors would then be
calling on the same property. Internally the name is being set to the
same as the rest of the tags, is this simply being ignored to go fetch
the messages on a standard name?...
Arron.
On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 05:45, David Winterfeldt wrote:
> I'm not 100% I'm sure I'm following what the problem
> is (probably missed some other e-mails). I was going
> to talk to you Aaron when I went to do these, but it
> seemed very simple so I went ahead and made them. I
> just wanted the nested messages and errors tags to be
> able to get the property name of the bean so you could
> display messages and errors next to a field from a
> list. These tags don't really need any other feature
> the nested tags provid. Currently the validator can
> handle lists, but not custom messages for each field.
> It does correctly create the full property as the
> error key though so you can display the error next to
> the field. Here is the example from
> web/validator/type.jsp where I tested this.
>
> <nested:iterate property="nameList">
> <tr>
> <th align="left">
>
> </th>
> <td align="left">
> <nested:messagesPresent property="value">
> <br>
> <ul>
> <nested:messages id="error"
> property="value">
> <li><bean:write name="error"/></li>
> </nested:messages>
> </ul>
> </nested:messagesPresent>
>
> <nested:text property="value" size="15"
> maxlength="15"/>
> </td>
> </tr>
> </nested:iterate>
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> David
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Nested Messages & Errors tags applicability...
Posted by David Winterfeldt <dw...@yahoo.com>.
I'm not 100% I'm sure I'm following what the problem
is (probably missed some other e-mails). I was going
to talk to you Aaron when I went to do these, but it
seemed very simple so I went ahead and made them. I
just wanted the nested messages and errors tags to be
able to get the property name of the bean so you could
display messages and errors next to a field from a
list. These tags don't really need any other feature
the nested tags provid. Currently the validator can
handle lists, but not custom messages for each field.
It does correctly create the full property as the
error key though so you can display the error next to
the field. Here is the example from
web/validator/type.jsp where I tested this.
<nested:iterate property="nameList">
<tr>
<th align="left">
</th>
<td align="left">
<nested:messagesPresent property="value">
<br>
<ul>
<nested:messages id="error"
property="value">
<li><bean:write name="error"/></li>
</nested:messages>
</ul>
</nested:messagesPresent>
<nested:text property="value" size="15"
maxlength="15"/>
</td>
</tr>
</nested:iterate>
Let me know what you think.
David
--- Arron Bates <st...@keyboardmonkey.com> wrote:
> Just curious as to the applicability of the Errors
> an Messages tags in
> the nested context...
>
> Because the nested tags use the one bean reference,
> I'm finding it hard
> to visualise using these tags within context. In the
> original tags,
> everything was an island, so it was all fine, but
> nesting against the
> one bean makes it a little fuzzy.
>
> Referencing the different bean means implanting a
> new root tag, which
> would mean you'd have to nest the tags all over
> again to get to the same
> point. It would be easier to go the route of the
> original
> errors/messages tags.
>
> I realise that it'd be really handy to be able to
> get at the same
> property that a text box is working off of, but the
> separate bean issue
> meant that I basically put it down to being out of
> context and as a
> result I didn't include them in the tags when I
> first wrote them.
>
> One way I can see it working is to make a small
> departure from the way
> the rest of the nested tags work, and allow the
> referencing of a
> different bean.
>
> This then raises the problem that if you do it for
> one, you should
> possibly allow the others. Not impossible. Just a
> check in the tags to
> see if there's a supplied bean name reference, if
> there is, allow it to
> go through.
>
> Up to this point I kept it as a "best practice" to
> leave the naming of
> any bean up to the root tag (well, it enforced it
> really).
>
> Means that the requirement of the root tag should
> probably be loosened
> up if a bean is explicitly provided. There will
> possibly be an ambiguity
> as to how far back the property will be calculated,
> and the definition
> of the nested tags being "properly marked up". But
> I'm probably
> over-thinking the issue.
>
> Any other thoughts?... any other committers actually
> using the nested
> tags?... :)
>
>
> Arron.
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>