An eventLink tells the application to do something. The context says
what you want to do it to.
When you aren't in a loop it is easy to figure out what to do things
to and you don't need a context because the thing you are doing the
action to is the same for the entire rendering of the page.
Thank you all for your answers. This behaviour of the loop is actually
unexpected. I see that I'll have to stick with a more static structure
or to rewrite the components in question. For the moment, I will pospone
these things and come back to them later.
And no, I havn't found anything
Hey there,
It seems I have a problem with tapestry's internal component IDs when
using a loop.
I have component called facetbox. As I have several facets, I need
several FacetBoxes:
ul
li type=facetbox .../li
li type=facetbox .../li
li type=facetbox .../li
/ul
In each facetbox
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 14:26:00 -0200, Erik Fäßler
erik.faess...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Hey there,
Hi!
You will notice that the internal ID identifying the component is gone.
It isn't gone. Now you have a single EventLink which is rendered once for
each Loop iteration. Static structure,
Thank you for your answer!
It isn't gone. Now you have a single EventLink which is rendered once
for each Loop iteration. Static structure, dynamic behavior. ;)
So when I have several components of the same type in my .tml it does a
difference to having a loop? I thought it's just a different
Hi,
I believe this is a common stumbling point with Loops in Tapestry and
the relation to static structure. Tapestry is able to set distinct
component IDs in the first case because there is a definition for each
facetbox component in your TML. However, in the version with the loop,
there is
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:22:28 -0200, Erik Fäßler
erik.faess...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Thank you for your answer!
It isn't gone. Now you have a single EventLink which is rendered once
for each Loop iteration. Static structure, dynamic behavior. ;)
So when I have several components of the same
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:45:54 -0200, Rich M rich...@moremagic.com wrote:
The challenge in your case is I don't believe you can dynamically assign
a component ID. I double checked myself just now, and t:id only took a
discrete ID (in 5.1.0.5), and was not happy pulling it from a property
or
On 02/18/2011 12:59 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo wrote:
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:45:54 -0200, Rich M rich...@moremagic.com wrote:
The challenge in your case is I don't believe you can dynamically
assign a component ID. I double checked myself just now, and t:id
only took a discrete ID (in
