RE: CMS Integration

2006-07-10 Thread wouter.cleuren
a common CMS component library would be a very nice feature/add-on:
 - not re-invent the wheel 
 - growing market need 
 - Tapestry will 'sell' more/better
 - ...

I'm interested in contributing/developing on this topic!

greetz


-Original Message-
From: Simeon Koptelov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: maandag 10 juli 2006 7:30
To: Tapestry users
Subject: Re: CMS Integration

Oh, if you're interested in it, I can give my code for JCR integration as a
base :)

2006/7/9, Lutz Hühnken [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Hi,

 I haven't really looked at it, but I was wondering... as far as I
 understand, you'd like to integrate CMS-managed content into a
 Tapestry-based site.

 You mention Magnolia... afaik, Magnolia uses a JSR 170 compliant
 content repository, such as Apache Jackrabbit
 (http://jackrabbit.apache.org/;), to store the content.
 It provides a number of JSP tags to access that content from within
 your page templates
 (http://magnolia.sourceforge.net/30/taglib/intro.html;).

 It seems getting content out of Jackrabbit is not all that hard. So
 here's my idea: Why don't we start a project to build some Tapestry
 components to access content repositories that conform with JSR 170? A
 possible approach could be to re-implement the Magnolia JSP taglib, or
 parts of it, as Tapestry components. Or maybe Stitches could be used
 as a starting point.

 This way, I would think, you could use any JSR 170 compliant CMS to
 manage your content, and could integrate the content in a Tapestry
 based site using this new component library.

 What do people think? Is that realistic? Would it work? Would such a
 component library be of interest to anyone?

 Lutz


 On 7/1/06, Mike Grundvig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Has anyone integrated any sort of CMS tool with Tapestry? I've looked
 into
  Magnolia and several others, but all seem to require an uphill battle if
  they are to be tied into Tapestry and I was wondering if someone else
 has
  already done this. Thanks!
 
  Michael Grundvig

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



dynamically generated form fields and form level validation

2006-05-18 Thread wouter.cleuren
Does someone already has a solution for this problem outlined below??

I'm using version 3.0.4

 

 

Chris Norris CNorris at widen.com writes:

 

 I think this is what you are talking about:

 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.tapestry.devel/1632

 

 It seems like they were talking in January 2004 (a year and a half
ago?

 Time flies...) about putting it in the next release... But still
hasn't

 been done? I'm still trying my page property validator (it'll hold
some

 state).  That seems a little cleaner than patching Tapestry.

 -Chris 

 

  -Original Message-

  From: robertz at scazdl.org [mailto:robertz at scazdl.org] 

  Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 12:56 PM

  To: Tapestry users

  Subject: Re: dynamically generated form fields and form level 

  validation

  

  Harish submitted a patch a /long/ while back that dealt with 

  the scenario

  of how to set a particular field in error when it's rendered 

  in a loop. He

  added a new index property, as I recall. The patch was 

  never applied,

  but if you search the archives for it,  you should be able to find
it.

  I also know that the patch cannot be cleanly applied to 3.0.3 due to

  conflicting changes, so, you may just need to take the patch 

  and use it as

  the basis for your own modifications.

  Will this issue be addressed in the new validation stuff Paul 

  is working

  on for 4.0?

  

  Robert

  

   I'm going to try to boil this down to the neccesities.  If 

  it doesn't

   make sense, I'll provide some code.

  

   I have a Foreach loop inside of a form.  The loop generates 

  a couple of

   sets of FieldLabel/ValidField components*.

  

   The problem is that two of the fields' validation depend on 

  each other.

   If both fields are empty, they both need to be marked as 

  errored so that

   the error markup will be written.  If one or the other has 

  a value, they

   are both valid.  Can someone point me in the best direction 

  for this?

  

   My first thought was to record the name of the ValidField 

  component when

   the page was getting the value for it.  I would get the 

  names, something

   like validComponentName and validComponentName$0.  At form 

  rewind time,

   though, I couldn't figure out how to get the components given
those

   names and set them in error.  It seems impossible, given 

  that getName()

   will always return the most recent name generated for the 

  component.  I

   tried going through the ValidationDelegate's FieldTrackings 

  and going

   through the map returned by getComponents(), neither of which
worked

   very well.

  

   My next option was going to be to make a special validator for
this

   purpose.  It would have to be a page property rather than a 

  bean so that

   the same validator would be used for both ValidFields.  All of
these

   approaches seem ugly to me.  Ideas?  Directions?

  

   -Chris

  

  

   *uses a Defer type component to take care of the off by one 

  validation

   error.  the Defer component wraps a FieldLabel and takes in 

  a block that

   contains a ValidField:

protected void renderComponent(IMarkupWriter writer,
IRequestCycle

   cycle)

{

 IMarkupWriter nested = writer.getNestedWriter();

 getBlock().renderBody(nested, cycle);

 renderBody(writer, cycle);

 nested.close();

}

  

  

  

  

 
-

  To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe at
jakarta.apache.org

  For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help at
jakarta.apache.org

  

  

 

 -

 To unsubscribe, e-mail: tapestry-user-unsubscribe at
jakarta.apache.org

 For additional commands, e-mail: tapestry-user-help at
jakarta.apache.org