Re: making form field visibility user driven
Will it? I don't know, there's always hope though! Another thing to keep in mind: there are many different flavours of multi-tenancy, so there's a chance it still won't match your particular requirements. Of course, once the execution context stuff is in place that will make it far easier to adapt it to whatever requirements you might have. -David On Jan 9, 2010, at 9:51 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: > David, > > With these changes, will multi-tenancy become a standard ofbiz > configuration option? > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > David E Jones wrote: >> Adrian, >> >> I'm planning to review this in the near future, possibly early next week but >> more likely later in the week. Fortunately there is market interest for >> this, and in my case I have a client that is considering using these changes >> for security, and building one form of multi-tenancy based on the execution >> context. >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jan 9, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >> >
Re: ContactMech infoString
Are those different organizations? They look like party group names to me... Though technically yes, you could put a description anywhere, or use the ContactMech.infoString since it is not use for phone numbers (it is used for certain other contact mech types though...). -David On Jan 9, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: > Hi David, > > The label is a string identifying the telephone number. E.g. for a > Party Group of "Chancery", the telephone numbers are: > > Chancery Registry (Issue & General Enquiries) TM 5.04 > 020 7947 6571 > > Chancery Masters Appointments (Hearings before Chancery Masters & > Consents) TM 7.09 > 020 7947 6095 > > Chancery Judges Listing (West Green WG04) > 020 7947 7717/6690 > > ... > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > > David E Jones wrote: >> I guess that depends, what is a "label string"... especially where does it >> come from and how will it be used? >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jan 9, 2010, at 11:17 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: >> >> >>> I would like to add a label string for party contactTelephone numbers. >>> The label text is highly variable, so would infoString be a good place >>> to store this information? >>> >> >>
Re: ContactMech infoString
Hi David, I think the other option (which is looking favorable) is to extend the entity TelecomNumber with a description field. Many thanks, Chris Christopher Snow wrote: > Hi David, > > The label is a string identifying the telephone number. E.g. for a > Party Group of "Chancery", the telephone numbers are: > > Chancery Registry (Issue & General Enquiries) TM 5.04 > 020 7947 6571 > > Chancery Masters Appointments (Hearings before Chancery Masters & > Consents) TM 7.09 > 020 7947 6095 > > Chancery Judges Listing (West Green WG04) > 020 7947 7717/6690 > > ... > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > > David E Jones wrote: > >> I guess that depends, what is a "label string"... especially where does it >> come from and how will it be used? >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jan 9, 2010, at 11:17 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: >> >> >> >>> I would like to add a label string for party contactTelephone numbers. >>> The label text is highly variable, so would infoString be a good place >>> to store this information? >>> >>> >> >> -- Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP Tel: 01453 890660 Mob: 07944 880950 Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk
patch process
I'm not quite sure of the proper process for extending ofbiz. I have extended the party component, changing editcontactmech.ftl and Contact.ftl Should I create a patch with these changes and put the patch in mycomponents patch folder? Do I then need to re-apply the patch every time I do an update from svn? Many thanks in advance, Chris
Re: ContactMech infoString
Hi David, The label is a string identifying the telephone number. E.g. for a Party Group of "Chancery", the telephone numbers are: Chancery Registry (Issue & General Enquiries) TM 5.04 020 7947 6571 Chancery Masters Appointments (Hearings before Chancery Masters & Consents) TM 7.09 020 7947 6095 Chancery Judges Listing (West Green WG04) 020 7947 7717/6690 ... Many thanks, Chris David E Jones wrote: > I guess that depends, what is a "label string"... especially where does it > come from and how will it be used? > > -David > > > On Jan 9, 2010, at 11:17 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: > > >> I would like to add a label string for party contactTelephone numbers. >> The label text is highly variable, so would infoString be a good place >> to store this information? >> > >
Re: ContactMech infoString
I guess that depends, what is a "label string"... especially where does it come from and how will it be used? -David On Jan 9, 2010, at 11:17 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: > I would like to add a label string for party contactTelephone numbers. > The label text is highly variable, so would infoString be a good place > to store this information?
ContactMech infoString
I would like to add a label string for party contactTelephone numbers. The label text is highly variable, so would infoString be a good place to store this information?
Re: making form field visibility user driven
David, With these changes, will multi-tenancy become a standard ofbiz configuration option? Many thanks, Chris David E Jones wrote: > Adrian, > > I'm planning to review this in the near future, possibly early next week but > more likely later in the week. Fortunately there is market interest for this, > and in my case I have a client that is considering using these changes for > security, and building one form of multi-tenancy based on the execution > context. > > -David > > > On Jan 9, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >
Re: making form field visibility user driven
Adrian, I'm planning to review this in the near future, possibly early next week but more likely later in the week. Fortunately there is market interest for this, and in my case I have a client that is considering using these changes for security, and building one form of multi-tenancy based on the execution context. -David On Jan 9, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: > No estimate. David Jones and I seem to be the only ones actively involved > right now, and our availability is limited. We need others to get involved. > > I will be making a big commit to the branch today. I'm adding security > auditing and making a few changes to the authorization manager API. > > -Adrian > > --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow wrote: > >> From: Christopher Snow >> Subject: Re: making form field visibility user driven >> To: user@ofbiz.apache.org >> Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 11:37 AM >> Nice! Is there a rough estimate >> of when the executioncontext branch >> will be merged back into trunk? >> >> Many thanks, >> >> Chris >> >> Adrian Crum wrote: >>> That capability is included in the proposed security >> redesign: >>> >>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+Security+Redesign >>> >>> and there is a working example of what you describe in >> the latest executioncontext branch. >>> >>> -Adrian >>> >>> --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow >> wrote: >>> >>> From: Christopher Snow Subject: making form field visibility user driven To: user@ofbiz.apache.org Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 9:33 AM I expect this has been discussed many times, but has anyone looked at making the visibility of form fields based on the >> current user. HtmlFormRenderer could be modified so that before >> it outputs a field, it could check a configuration object so determine >> whether the field (identified by its name, e.g >> WorkEffortForms.xml#EditICalendarPartyAssign:statusId) should be displayed for the current user. A >> configuration screen in webtools could then be created to declare what fields >> should be hidden for a particular user. This concept could be extended to look at >> PartyGroups and assigned organisations so that users from Organisation A >> would see different forms to those users from Organisation B. Has this been discussed before? Is there any >> merit in this suggestion? Many thanks, Chris >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP >> >> Tel: 01453 890660 >> Mob: 07944 880950 >> Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk >> >> > > >
Re: making form field visibility user driven
No estimate. David Jones and I seem to be the only ones actively involved right now, and our availability is limited. We need others to get involved. I will be making a big commit to the branch today. I'm adding security auditing and making a few changes to the authorization manager API. -Adrian --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow wrote: > From: Christopher Snow > Subject: Re: making form field visibility user driven > To: user@ofbiz.apache.org > Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 11:37 AM > Nice! Is there a rough estimate > of when the executioncontext branch > will be merged back into trunk? > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > Adrian Crum wrote: > > That capability is included in the proposed security > redesign: > > > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+Security+Redesign > > > > and there is a working example of what you describe in > the latest executioncontext branch. > > > > -Adrian > > > > --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow > wrote: > > > > > >> From: Christopher Snow > >> Subject: making form field visibility user driven > >> To: user@ofbiz.apache.org > >> Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 9:33 AM > >> I expect this has been discussed many > >> times, but has anyone looked at > >> making the visibility of form fields based on the > current > >> user. > >> > >> HtmlFormRenderer could be modified so that before > it > >> outputs a field, it > >> could check a configuration object so determine > whether the > >> field > >> (identified by its name, e.g > >> > WorkEffortForms.xml#EditICalendarPartyAssign:statusId) > >> should be > >> displayed for the current user. A > configuration > >> screen in webtools > >> could then be created to declare what fields > should be > >> hidden for a > >> particular user. > >> > >> This concept could be extended to look at > PartyGroups and > >> assigned > >> organisations so that users from Organisation A > would see > >> different > >> forms to those users from Organisation B. > >> > >> Has this been discussed before? Is there any > merit in > >> this suggestion? > >> > >> Many thanks, > >> > >> Chris > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP > > Tel: 01453 890660 > Mob: 07944 880950 > Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk > >
Re: making form field visibility user driven
Nice! Is there a rough estimate of when the executioncontext branch will be merged back into trunk? Many thanks, Chris Adrian Crum wrote: > That capability is included in the proposed security redesign: > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+Security+Redesign > > and there is a working example of what you describe in the latest > executioncontext branch. > > -Adrian > > --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow wrote: > > >> From: Christopher Snow >> Subject: making form field visibility user driven >> To: user@ofbiz.apache.org >> Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 9:33 AM >> I expect this has been discussed many >> times, but has anyone looked at >> making the visibility of form fields based on the current >> user. >> >> HtmlFormRenderer could be modified so that before it >> outputs a field, it >> could check a configuration object so determine whether the >> field >> (identified by its name, e.g >> WorkEffortForms.xml#EditICalendarPartyAssign:statusId) >> should be >> displayed for the current user. A configuration >> screen in webtools >> could then be created to declare what fields should be >> hidden for a >> particular user. >> >> This concept could be extended to look at PartyGroups and >> assigned >> organisations so that users from Organisation A would see >> different >> forms to those users from Organisation B. >> >> Has this been discussed before? Is there any merit in >> this suggestion? >> >> Many thanks, >> >> Chris >> >> > > > > -- Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP Tel: 01453 890660 Mob: 07944 880950 Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk
Re: making form field visibility user driven
That capability is included in the proposed security redesign: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/OFBiz+Security+Redesign and there is a working example of what you describe in the latest executioncontext branch. -Adrian --- On Sat, 1/9/10, Christopher Snow wrote: > From: Christopher Snow > Subject: making form field visibility user driven > To: user@ofbiz.apache.org > Date: Saturday, January 9, 2010, 9:33 AM > I expect this has been discussed many > times, but has anyone looked at > making the visibility of form fields based on the current > user. > > HtmlFormRenderer could be modified so that before it > outputs a field, it > could check a configuration object so determine whether the > field > (identified by its name, e.g > WorkEffortForms.xml#EditICalendarPartyAssign:statusId) > should be > displayed for the current user. A configuration > screen in webtools > could then be created to declare what fields should be > hidden for a > particular user. > > This concept could be extended to look at PartyGroups and > assigned > organisations so that users from Organisation A would see > different > forms to those users from Organisation B. > > Has this been discussed before? Is there any merit in > this suggestion? > > Many thanks, > > Chris >
making form field visibility user driven
I expect this has been discussed many times, but has anyone looked at making the visibility of form fields based on the current user. HtmlFormRenderer could be modified so that before it outputs a field, it could check a configuration object so determine whether the field (identified by its name, e.g WorkEffortForms.xml#EditICalendarPartyAssign:statusId) should be displayed for the current user. A configuration screen in webtools could then be created to declare what fields should be hidden for a particular user. This concept could be extended to look at PartyGroups and assigned organisations so that users from Organisation A would see different forms to those users from Organisation B. Has this been discussed before? Is there any merit in this suggestion? Many thanks, Chris
Re: applet / location of external jars
it has been a while since I worked with ecommerce at that level, I don't remember the exact Ftl or widget but if you find where the css that showss up in the view source of the ecommerce page is defined and you find where css file is located should get you on the right track. maybe someone else can be more specific. Alexander1893 sent the following on 1/9/2010 2:39 AM: > Perhaps an addition information: > > this is the error in the log: > > 2010-01-09 11:28:54,968 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ > CmsEvents.java:107:INFO ] pathinfo: /jumploader_z.jar > 2010-01-09 11:28:54,968 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ > CmsEvents.java:134:INFO ] Path INFO for Alias: jumploader_z.jar > 2010-01-09 11:28:55,187 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ > CmsEvents.java:185:INFO ] contentId: jumploader_z.jar > 2010-01-09 11:28:56,468 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ > RequestHandler.java:593:INFO ] Ran Event > [java:org.ofbiz.content.cms.CmsEvents#cms] from [request], result is [error] > 2010-01-09 11:28:56,468 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ > RequestHandler.java:399:ERROR] Request cms caused an error with the > following message: Content: null [jumploader_z.jar] is not a publish point > for the current website: eCommerce Web Site [WebStore] > > > Alexander > > > Alexander1893 wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I want to integrate an applet. I think the problem is, that the jar is not >> found. I read the previous threads about applets... so I did the >> following: >> >> Code in ftl (located in ecommerce/customer): >> >> > code="jmaster.jumploader.app.JumpLoaderApplet.class" >> archive="jumploader_z.jar" >> width="600" >> height="400" >> mayscript> >> >> >> >> An I added the jumploader_z.jar to framework/webapp/build/lib - but >> obviously that's wrong... >> >> Can anyone help? >> >> Thanks >> Alexander >> >
Re: applet / location of external jars
Perhaps an addition information: this is the error in the log: 2010-01-09 11:28:54,968 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ CmsEvents.java:107:INFO ] pathinfo: /jumploader_z.jar 2010-01-09 11:28:54,968 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ CmsEvents.java:134:INFO ] Path INFO for Alias: jumploader_z.jar 2010-01-09 11:28:55,187 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ CmsEvents.java:185:INFO ] contentId: jumploader_z.jar 2010-01-09 11:28:56,468 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ RequestHandler.java:593:INFO ] Ran Event [java:org.ofbiz.content.cms.CmsEvents#cms] from [request], result is [error] 2010-01-09 11:28:56,468 (http-0.0.0.0-8443-2) [ RequestHandler.java:399:ERROR] Request cms caused an error with the following message: Content: null [jumploader_z.jar] is not a publish point for the current website: eCommerce Web Site [WebStore] Alexander Alexander1893 wrote: > > Hi all, > > I want to integrate an applet. I think the problem is, that the jar is not > found. I read the previous threads about applets... so I did the > following: > > Code in ftl (located in ecommerce/customer): > >code="jmaster.jumploader.app.JumpLoaderApplet.class" > archive="jumploader_z.jar" > width="600" > height="400" > mayscript> > > > > An I added the jumploader_z.jar to framework/webapp/build/lib - but > obviously that's wrong... > > Can anyone help? > > Thanks > Alexander > -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/applet-location-of-external-jars-tp1009767p1010228.html Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: How to show form field tool tip on mouse over
Hi Michael,
having a lookup that returns multiple selected values in a field is a
general enough task that should be addressed with a general purpose
tool.
It could be a different decorator from which exten the lookup
decorator (so for example we could have a multiLookupDecorator in
addition to the actual lookupDecorator).
In one project I have already done this, I need some time to see if
this was implemented in an enough general way to be reused.
-Bruno
2010/1/9 Michael Xu (xudong) :
> hi Bruno,
>
> However, such improvement needs to change the form widget schema and the
> render. I proposed another way to make form widget more flexible. For your
> reference, I pasted it here:
>
>
>
> hi all,
>
> In ofbiz form, we can use lookup controller for fields which link to
> entities. But the lookup controller only support to return single value. How
> to implement a multiple lookup?
>
> Looking into source code, it seems that we have to extend a new controller
> in form widget schema and implement it in the form render. Is it a correct
> way to go?
>
> BTW: In my opinion, it is not flexible to extend form widget in current
> design. (correct me if I am wrong). Let's take one example.
>
> target="createGlAccountOrganization" title="" default-map-name="account"
> header-row-style="header-row" default-table-style="basic-table">
>
>
> description="${accountCode} - ${accountName} [${glAccountId}]">
>
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
> Here, we have to use tag to tell system to render a HTML
> drop-down component. But what if a customized field? Then do we have to
> change form widget schema for that field? And then add the render logic in
> the long switch-cases?
>
> Maybe we can refactor the design, like this:
>
> target="createGlAccountOrganization" title="" default-map-name="account"
> header-row-style="header-row" default-table-style="basic-table">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ...
>
>
> with the new design, then we don't need to break the schema and change the
> core code of render logic. Instead, we just need to implement a new
> controller from a predefined controller interface. And then we can reuse it
> in all forms.
>
> (In here, due to the limitation of current form widget, we have to give up
> form and use FTL directly.)
>
> --
> Regards,
> Michael Xu (xudong)
> www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 | Mobile: (86) 135 0135
> 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>
>> Having a field widget property that renders to the title property to
>> the input field seems much simpler.
>> -Bruno
>>
>> 2010/1/8 Parimal Gain :
>> > Hello Raj,
>> >
>> > One way to do this might be call javascript method from the form field
>> > and write necessary code that you want to display as tooltip within the
>> > method.
>> > You can call javascript method by following manner :
>> >
>> > > > action="javascript:methodName();"/>
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > --
>> > Parimal Gain
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, 2010-01-08 at 13:50 +0530, Raj Saini wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I want to show the tool tip for a form field on mouse over. All examples
>> >> Various forms I found in OFBiz, render the tool tip as hint label. Is it
>> >> possible to show the tool tip on mouse over on a form field?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Raj
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
