RE: BodyTagSupport
A couple of things I noticed.
1) Your HTML does not specify the count so the body is skipped.
2) You rely on the tag engine to do your looping. While this may work if the
engine is not correctly implemented then it won't. I would just do the
looping in the doAfterBody. That way you have all of the body contents and
you have the count.
Hope this helps.
-Original Message-
From: Namor Taror [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 5:58 PM
To: Orion-Interest
Subject: BodyTagSupport
Has anybody had any problems with the iterative tag execution? Even my
simplest 'test' tag does not execute its body. doStartTag and doEndTag are
executing fine but the doIntBody and doAfterBody are not execiting at all.
taglib.tld:
tag
namegetCalendarList/name
tagclasscom.taror.schedule.taglib.calendar.CalendarList/tagclass
bodycontentjsp/bodycontent
infoList.../info
Class code:
public class LoopTag extends BodyTagSupport
{
private int count;
private int pos;
public void setCount(int count)
{
this.count = count;
}
public int doStartTag()
{
if(count 0)
return EVAL_BODY_TAG;
else
return SKIP_BODY;
}
public int doAfterBody() throws JspException
{
// Iterate until the count's up
if(++pos count)
return EVAL_BODY_TAG;
else
return SKIP_BODY;
}
public int doEndTag() throws JspException
{
pos = 0;
try
{
if(bodyContent != null) // Check if we even entered
the body
bodyContent.writeOut(bodyContent.getEnclosingWriter());
}
catch(java.io.IOException e)
{
throw new JspException(IO Error: +
e.getMessage());
}
return EVAL_PAGE;
}
}
JSP:
%@ page session=false %
%@ taglib uri=ScheduleUtil prefix=schedule %
html
head
titleCalendar List/title
/head
body
table
schedule:getCalendarList
tr
tdlksdjhg /td
/tr
/schedule:getCalendarList
/table
/body
/html
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: I think, I will start a support site too....
I usually don't step into these times of discussions but I must object to your statement about sites going down. In the bad old days before the web, client/server, etc. a system manager would be fired for having a system go down as many times as this list and the sites you mentioned have. It is time the IT world stops saying gee that's life stuff doesn't work every now and then. In the mainframe/minicomputer world 99.9% up time is the norm. That is what the IT world needs to have as a goal 100% reliable. The list reliability is very poor even by Internet standards. Simply moving the list to a list service would solve the issue once and for all if Ironflare would do that the list would be stable. Having the list stable is the first step to projecting a sense of support and stability of Ironflare. That would stop the complaints about support. Heck if Ironflare [hell I would do] take about an hour to setup a list on the list services this issue would die. Secondly, spending a week or less to build a portal site and have it hosted at tier1 or tier2 web hosting companying would handle the minimum that Ironflare's owners wish to put out on support. Total cost to Ironflare probably less than $2k a year or the revenue from the sale of one copy of Orion. -Original Message- From: Michael J. Cannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:43 PM To: Orion-Interest Subject: Re: I think, I will start a support site too I personally think third-party support sites are a good thing. All of them I have seen so far are primarily commercial in nature, in order to counter the complaints of the corporate users that there was no 'credible support.' It's capitalism in action: see a need in the market and meet it. ...as to what the maillist runs, it really doesn't matter. All websites go down...Hotmail, Yahoo, even Slashdot...the rumor - never confirmed - was that it did indeed run on Orionserver. So what? Now you have another place to go when it is down (the new support sites). ...and if Orion is good enough for you to run a web site - (and it is: http:/www.standardset.com/ ) well, it should be good enough for Orion, especially since they developed it and this is one of the 'load and valence test platforms (if it does indeed run on Orion) for the product. Finally, the more info the merrier, and, given the levels of interest and participation by the people who have started these support sites and the support they have shown everyone on this maillist, I don't think any of us are going to suffer. Michael J. Cannon - Original Message - From: Alex Paransky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Orion-Interest [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:13 PM Subject: I think, I will start a support site too (in style of Andy Rooney) I see everyone is starting their support sites for Orion. I think it's a poor solution for something that's broken, mainly, this mailing list. How many support sites do we actually have now? Why is it such a problem to keep the mailing list up and running? Now, we need to post the message to at least 3 places to make sure it gets maximum exposure. I think I will start a support site, that posts to all other support sites, just so that people don't have to search various support sites for help. I don't mind so many support sites starting up, I just think they are starting up for poor reasons and fragmenting what little knowledge we already have about this product. What is the problem with the list? Why is it down half the time? I hope it's not running under Orion... -AP_
FW: I think, I will start a support site too....
resend to list -Original Message- From: Rabi Satter Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:24 AM To: 'Orion-Interest' Subject: RE: I think, I will start a support site too I usually don't step into these times of discussions but I must object to your statement about sites going down. In the bad old days before the web, client/server, etc. a system manager would be fired for having a system go down as many times as this list and the sites you mentioned have. It is time the IT world stops saying gee that's life stuff doesn't work every now and then. In the mainframe/minicomputer world 99.9% up time is the norm. That is what the IT world needs to have as a goal 100% reliable. The list reliability is very poor even by Internet standards. Simply moving the list to a list service would solve the issue once and for all if Ironflare would do that the list would be stable. Having the list stable is the first step to projecting a sense of support and stability of Ironflare. That would stop the complaints about support. Heck if Ironflare [hell I would do] take about an hour to setup a list on the list services this issue would die. Secondly, spending a week or less to build a portal site and have it hosted at tier1 or tier2 web hosting companying would handle the minimum that Ironflare's owners wish to put out on support. Total cost to Ironflare probably less than $2k a year or the revenue from the sale of one copy of Orion. -Original Message- From: Michael J. Cannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:43 PM To: Orion-Interest Subject: Re: I think, I will start a support site too I personally think third-party support sites are a good thing. All of them I have seen so far are primarily commercial in nature, in order to counter the complaints of the corporate users that there was no 'credible support.' It's capitalism in action: see a need in the market and meet it. ...as to what the maillist runs, it really doesn't matter. All websites go down...Hotmail, Yahoo, even Slashdot...the rumor - never confirmed - was that it did indeed run on Orionserver. So what? Now you have another place to go when it is down (the new support sites). ...and if Orion is good enough for you to run a web site - (and it is: http:/www.standardset.com/ ) well, it should be good enough for Orion, especially since they developed it and this is one of the 'load and valence test platforms (if it does indeed run on Orion) for the product. Finally, the more info the merrier, and, given the levels of interest and participation by the people who have started these support sites and the support they have shown everyone on this maillist, I don't think any of us are going to suffer. Michael J. Cannon - Original Message - From: Alex Paransky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Orion-Interest [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:13 PM Subject: I think, I will start a support site too (in style of Andy Rooney) I see everyone is starting their support sites for Orion. I think it's a poor solution for something that's broken, mainly, this mailing list. How many support sites do we actually have now? Why is it such a problem to keep the mailing list up and running? Now, we need to post the message to at least 3 places to make sure it gets maximum exposure. I think I will start a support site, that posts to all other support sites, just so that people don't have to search various support sites for help. I don't mind so many support sites starting up, I just think they are starting up for poor reasons and fragmenting what little knowledge we already have about this product. What is the problem with the list? Why is it down half the time? I hope it's not running under Orion... -AP_
RE: SOAP/WSDL support?
If you want SOAP it is no big deal. You just need a SOAP client. Also who needs to write a web service when you can just use the EJB directly via SOAP. Works great. MS may have thought up something worth while. I don't know why you need to break Orion's optimization. -Original Message- From: Michael J. Cannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 3:06 AM To: Orion-Interest Subject: RE: SOAP/WSDL support? Gottabe xerxes. After their victory in the W3C, IBM borged XML4J and handed the dregs to Apache. Xerxes is required. Apache doesn't know from Crimson or JAXP (although the XP model leapfrogs SOAP for Java, as per the comments in JSR101). Right now, if you want ApacheSOAP, you gotta break Orion's optimization. From the ApacheSOAP page: Apache-SOAP requires Apache Xerces (Java) version 1.1.2 or later. These versions support the DOM level 2 candidate recommendation which provides namespace support. If you have any other XML parsers (or other JAR files which may have the org.w3c.dom.* interfaces), then it is very important that you place the JAR file xerces.jar from Xerces at the front of your classpath. Apache-SOAP will not work otherwise. and: While it is possible to use another parser, the current codebase does not support making this change conveniently; hence the mechanism is not documented here. The link is here: http://xml.apache.org/websrc/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/xml-soap/java/docs/instal l/index.html (hope that wraps properly.) My experiences with SOAP on WebSphere, JRun, Oracle and the BEAst, is that its like a side of beef followed by a pound of bacon, followed by a quadruple-decker banana split without the fruit, washed down with a gallon of buttermilk: it may sound appetizing, byut in the long run, it just serves to clog things up. (joke folks, for the humor impaired). It's big, fat, slow and UGLY. With JAXP/Crimson and the various XSLT implementations, as well as JMS and JAXM (WG/JSR 67) and XML-RPC (WG/JSR 101) as well as JSR 102 (JDOM 1.0), JSR 104 (XML TRUST) and JSR/WG 95 (J2EE Services for Extended Transactions), we get FAR MORE than the W3C gave us. Keep in mind (in becomes clearer when you analyze the Executive Committee voting records) that SOAP is seen by the WAS vendors as an 'additional service' for which they can charge a lot of additional money. For IBM, it will be MQSeries, for the BEAst, more connectors, and for Oracle, well that will further their drive to 'increase prfits and improve margins (sic).' XML-RPC is the way to go, not SOAP. SOAP is simply what pieces of XML-RPC Microsoft let us have. They lost in court and they're back to their old 'embrace-extend-extinguish' tricks, this time cheered on by their former rivals, who see nothing but bigger margins. Which would you rather have. Pieces of proprietary classes, or the whole schmeer as a true Java API? Or, to put it in the words of Dave Winer, (the creator of XML-RPC and co-creator of SOAP) candidly at a Web conference before Microsoft fully suborned him: SOAP is for dopes. Now, here's the Java way for J2EE, from the Blueprint: http://java.sun.com/features/2001/02/xmlj2ee.html and more: http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/onlineTraining/protocolhandlers/ (watch that wrap, again) and, finally, the WAS vendors, in all their nastiness: http://java.sun.com/aboutJava/communityprocess/vote/jsr/jsr_101.html Looking at the Apoache Project's XML pages, though, looks like the pressure is on Sun to knuckle under, or Apache's gonna take it's ball and go home: The Crimson codebase is based on the Sun Project X parser. It is also the parser currently shipping in Sun products; however, the future plan is to move to a different codebase called Xerces Java 2. Xerces 2 is currently under development. [Link to Xerces 2, once a project page has been created.] from: http://xml.apache.org/crimson/ If I got a vote (which none of us do) it would be to wait and follow the JCS and spend the time optimizing Orion for EJB and JSP and servlets and XHTML DOM. FASTER, smaller, better. For those that want all of the functions of Apache/Tomcat with all of its stability and speed (heheheheheh), use that, or follow the directions above to implement Xerxes and SOAP for JRun. It should work for 1.4.7 and 1.4.8. Speed is good. Simple is better. Both are best. Go Magnus and Karl. dedmike mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Cannon-Brookes Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 9:30 PM To: Orion-Interest Subject: RE: SOAP/WSDL support? Kevin, Orion 1.4.8 supports JAXP 1.1 and removes the need for Xerces. (It updates to the latest Xalan, and also uses Crimson). Not sure how this affects your ApacheSOAP stuff (sounds interesting - any URLs to read up?) -mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Duffey, Kevin Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 11:59
RE: Using EJBs with Delphi
Use SOAP. It makes it very easy to call the EJBs using the ApacheSOAP implementation. -Original Message- From: Sergei Batiuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 10:27 AM To: Orion-Interest Subject: Using EJBs with Delphi Hi EJB gurus, Does anynone know how to connect to an EJB from a dephi client app? Thanks in advance, Sergei Batiuk.
RE: Any news from Orion yet??
As a former trainer I can understand exactly what Kevin is trying to say. That is when you do training you need a platform for the students to learn. In the case of EJB you don't say gee here is how it should work and have a nice day. You say here is how it works and now lets have you build an example. The spec does not help you and your students build a "working" example. You need an app server. As for the cost at $1500 a pop per workstation and a typical training room of 15 workstations plus trainer workstation that is $24,000 not including cost of hardware and other software to support training people on EJB like JBuilder. JBuilder Enterprise is $2999 and you can see that a training room can quickly become an expensive proposition without aid from the vendor. I have not even begun to add the cost of developing courseware and instructors. Regardless, what is more disheartening is the lack of response from Orion. Quite frankly the fast way to become the number one app server is by training people. Those people then become your main sales force and with little or no cost to the company. -Original Message- From: Kevin Duffey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 1:41 AM To: Orion-Interest Subject: RE: RE: Any news from Orion yet?? I am sorry, but I don't quite understand how training of EJB on Orion is any different than that of other platforms? You are trainging EJB, not the vendor application server. EJB is EJB, no matter what platform it runs on. If every vendor adhered to the spec as they should, an EJB will run on any app server. Also, are you providing an online service that teaches over the internet and you need Orion to run that site? Or do you have in-class instruction and each person in the class needs to use Orion? I am unclear as to why you only need one license? Orion is free to use for all purposes other than production use. I am not sure that an inclass training counts for production use or not. I am still stumped on why it is you need Orion specific EJB training. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 9:41 PM To: Orion-Interest Cc: Orion-Interest Subject: Re: RE: Any news from Orion yet?? All, Running a training program for EJB's gives me a different perspective when dealing with EJB application vendors like Orion. My experience is that they (expensive vendors like BEA ) offer institutions like mine free licences and trainers in the hopes that newly educated programmers would evangelize their products. I have repeatedly asked for assistance in training engineers in EJB's using the Orion product. They have refused to answer. All we ask is that they provide us with a single license so that we may set up an interactive training site for distance education for a "Java and the Internet Course". If they truly wish to educate java-programers in Orion, you'd think they'd jump at this. We charge no money for training, and we benefit the independant learner in the ways of programming EJB's with Orion. This course is open to all, but Orion's lack of response means none of us can gain from it. If you would like to learn more about the mystery of EJB'S, LET ORION KNOW. We need your help. Mike Van C.E.O. JUGerNaut
Jikes
Has anyone got Jikes to work with Orion? If so how? Thanks Rabi Satter
