cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruno Dumon <>
Subject Re: [Woody-binding] wb:repeater unique-path
Date Thu, 06 Nov 2003 09:15:57 GMT
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 21:23, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Bruno Dumon dijo:
> > On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 18:51, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> >> Hi:
> >>
> >> I am trying to do a "" from an empty displayed form.I
> >> have 2 days with this sample and still not working. :-(
> >>
> >>
> >> My problem is that inside the "repeater" there is only 1 value
> >> (res_id) of datatype integer.
> >>
> >> Binding just save the first 2 values and an empty repeater.
> >
> > Is the res_id field a field that the user can edit?
> Yep. The subform has 2 fields:
> res_id - The Foreign Key for a resouces of the application
> rol_id - Foreign key to master in a master-detail relation.
> So, we intend to allow the user to choose the resouces. That is the idea.
> Also: The primary key are the 2 fields.
> > The current repeater-binding assumes that new rows are those with
> > an empty id field (res_id your case). Thus if these are editable
> > by the user and the user puts a value in them, the repeater binding
> > will not detect that these are new rows.
> :-(
> Damn! This is for sure the origin of my martyrdom. I am happy to discover
> that at the end, this was not my fault. This is simply because it is not
> implemented yet.
> Often I prefer to try many times before write to the list. Maybe this is
> not a good approach because I lose many time trying to do the imposible.
> :-(
> > However, it is of course possible to implement alternative
> > repeater-binding strategies. One that's also available is
> > wb:simple-repeater (see javadoc of the class
> > SimpleRepeaterJXPathBindingBuilder). This binding works by first
> > removing all items, and the adding all the items in the repeater.
> OK. I will try this.
> > If this approach is not acceptable for you, I think it is possible to
> > adjust the "normal" repeater binding so that it detects new id's as new
> > rows (instead of only null id's).
> I think sometimes it is aceptable at all because there is no other approach:
> The user iscreating a new document (master-detail at once) so Primary Keys
> (PK) are not defined yet. So how I can give them a value. This is why they
> are empty. Also will be empty in any case when you insert a new row for
> the repeater.
> I realize it is hard to separate the form from the DB while developing DB
> applications, but I am trying....
> So in the Woody example, I think woody would be able to manage this type
> of forms too.

Of course. I've committed a fix to CVS, could you try it out?

> >> BTW, A question why we need to define the unique-path attribute as
> >> "@res_id" AFAIK, a collection cannot have an attribute called res_id.
> >> Please explain. :-D
> >
> > It is not an attribute of the collection, but of the individual objects
> > in the collection.
> Please explain where is this attribute stored. I don't defined it in my case.

Yes you did :-) It is the res_id field in the Auth_permission class. I
think that instead of "@res_id" you could also put "res_id" in the
unique-path attribute. JXPath probably treats those two the same.

BTW, names like res_id and Auth_permission don't follow the java naming
conventions, better would be resId and AuthPermission.

Bruno Dumon                   
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center                

View raw message