tupRequestAndResponse(true);
tester.getServletRequest().setRequestToRedirectString(url.toString());
tester.processRequestCycle(cycle);
}
Regards,
Sebastiaan
On 11/28/2011 08:20 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for your answer. Unfortunately for the moment I don't have the
opportuni
35 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
Hi,
With Wicket 1.5 you can use executeUrl() to do that.
p = startPage
c = p.get("")
b = c.getBehaviorByXyz()
u = b.getCallbackUrl()
fullUrl = u + "&foo=bar&wicket-ajax=true"
executeUrl(fullUrl)
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Sebastia
Hi all,
I've got a page which calls wicket from javascript as described by the page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/calling-wicket-from-javascript.html
That is, in my JavaScript I call a function:
function callWicket() {
var wcall = wicketAjaxGet('$url$' + '$args$', function() { },
functi
page as string.
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Hi,
I'm using WicketTester to assertInvisible some components. Now I have the
following situation:
In the code I say comp1 is invisible, so the whole enclosure is invisible.
However, in WicketTester, assertI
Hi,
I'm using WicketTester to assertInvisible some components. Now I have
the following situation:
In the code I say comp1 is invisible, so the whole enclosure is
invisible. However, in WicketTester, assertInvisible("comp2") fails.
I am aware of a previous post about this:
http://
Hi,
I'm implementing a Wicket application that has heavy use of styling and
localization. I want to place the resources for these styles and locales
in an external directory structure (not in the war). Basically, I want
the following structure:
/external/
Hi,
I would like all the validation strings on a specific page to have a
specified prefix, e.g., if I have a field "password" with a length
validator on my page, I would like the following resource strings tried
in the listed order:
myPageLabel.password.StringValidator.minimum
password.Strin
it isn't. I think it should remain an error.
Just my 0.02 though.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk
wrote:
Pointbreak wrote:
Not an answer to your question, but why fight this kind of stuff? It's
an invalid request, so it should result in an error.
I actually pre
Pointbreak wrote:
Not an answer to your question, but why fight this kind of stuff? It's
an invalid request, so it should result in an error.
I actually prefer it would result in a 404 for the client and nothing
more. Perhaps, when enabling DEBUG, it can log the message + exception
it is curr
c type Foo should be parameterized
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Cheers,
Larry
-Original Message-----
From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 3:57 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: (Class>) casting troubles
Zappaterrini, Larry wrote:
Sorry,
Don't use a HiddenField on the Wicket side but a WebMarkupContainer. The
HTML side remains the same (i.e., input tag).
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Mathias P.W Nilsson wrote:
I have a page that has 2 fragment. One for normal ordering and one for credit
card ordering.
When sending the input type hidden
I'm +1 for trying to decouple model from component, and if it takes
longer then so be it.
I'm pretty convinced that the problem is the 1-1 model-component
coupling and that generics only pointed out this problem.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
so i tried to remove the generic type
illegal).
2) How do you get rid of the warning in Class clazz = Foo.class
without using Class? Because it would seem strange if there is no
warning free way to use a certain language construct...
Regards,
Sebastiaan
-Original Message-
From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE
Martin Funk wrote:
Foo> rawbar = new Foo(); // DOES NOT WORK
- THIS IS CAUSING ONE HALF OF ALL OUR HEADACHES
Btw, this does work (like you expect):
Foo> rawbar2 = new Foo>();
maybe some more wisdom can be found here:
http://www.angelikalanger.com/GenericsFAQ/FAQSections/TechnicalDetails.
casts):
Bar bar = new RawBar();
So is it then a subtype? Or isn't it? It's all terribly inconsistent if
you ask me. :-(
Regards,
Sebastiaan
-Original Message-----
From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:31 AM
To: users@wicket.
ARgh, you always make typos with this stuff.
See correction.
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Martin Funk wrote:
Class> means "class of (anything that extends (page of
anything))".
I'm not so sure.
There are 2 separate issues:
ISSUE 1: Foo> is not assignable from a Foo
Martin Funk wrote:
Class> means "class of (anything that extends (page of
anything))".
I'm not so sure.
There are 2 separate issues:
ISSUE 1: Foo> is not assignable from a Foo
where RawBar extends Bar as a raw type. That is, given:
static class Foo {
}
static class Bar {
}
st
Martin Funk wrote:
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
I haven't read the whole thread, but you should be fine as long as your
returned page class uses generics...
Here's what I use in one app, no warnings, no casts:
@Override
public Class> getHomePage() {
return Home.class;
}
public
Yes, property model (and compound friends) don't mix well with generics.
With generics a type safe alternative is wanted (and a very good start
is Matej and Johan's type-safe model implementation).
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Jan Kriesten wrote:
hi al,
The second is almost certainly worth doing. Th
You could use Java's covariant return types to override getModel() to
return a specific type. Which would mean that you would need to subclass
to "simulate" generics (with a new subclass for each type). Also, when
using anonymous subclasses it becomes rather pointless and you'd be back
to casti
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "raw type".
- Brill Pappin
-----Original Message-
From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 11:53 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: users, please give us your opinion: what is your take on
gene
Jan Kriesten wrote:
Hi Sebastiaan,
I *really* would like to see a clarification of this statement. In
Wicket the component and model are very tightly coupled.
that's part of the problem, agreed.
Kind of "late in the game" to do anything about that it seems though.
And I don't know if I ag
Brill Pappin wrote:
Why can't this be done the way the java API does it, and allow people to use
it or not as they want?
Wicket is pretty clean in terms of the API, and there are interfaces for
most things... So what's the problem with adding the generics to the
interfaces?
AFAIK this would allo
James Carman wrote:
I'm adding a "Gotchas" section now.
Your pallete gotcha seems more like a JIRA to me. :-) It's not really
about generics in general, but about a specific choice in 1 component
(which really seems incorrect to me, i.e., PECS).
One of the gotcha's I think is the getHomePag
Hi,
But IMHO putting generics on Component is a bad design, since it per se
touches all of Wicket's Components without urgent need.
I *really* would like to see a clarification of this statement. In
Wicket the component and model are very tightly coupled. What is a *good
design* alternative,
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
I haven't said anything up to this point, but we really don't seem to be
getting anywhere with what is turning into a religious war. I, for one,
have already started using 1.4, and love the generics, despite the extra
verbosity. It gives me extra type safety and code sel
Jan Kriesten wrote:
hi johan,
But if you have a lot of Link for you cases
then make 1 simple subclass of Link
so anyone make your own wrapper to get readable sources again? let me
think: how many webmarkupcontainer, link, page etc. classes do i use
with void?
i don't think that's a serio
Jan Kriesten wrote:
Hi Johan,
ahh yes thats true i overlooked your changes..
then yes currently you have to do new Link (to get rid of the
warnings)
there are quite annoying many cases of this kind, where you really just
don't need to add models to components and have to boilerplate these
:
IModel x = getModel();
IModel y = getModel();
and it will compile just fine... :-(
I'd rather have no generics than a dirty hack like this.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
johan
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Joni Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 14:44 +0200, Sebasti
Joni Freeman wrote:
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 14:44 +0200, Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Generified component touches *ALL* code in Wicket, wether you care or
not. IModel itself is rather contained.
Yes, but in my opinion rather useless as well. Plus you get heaps of
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Generified component touches *ALL* code in Wicket, wether you care or
not. IModel itself is rather contained.
Yes, but in my opinion rather useless as well. Plus you get he
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Generics are hard, especially for library/framework designers: it's hard to
get them exactly right, especially with wildcards in complex cases. But just
because they are not curren
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
That is not my problem. The problem is that Component is confusing
as hell and opens up the box of pandorra wrt generics. I *like*
IModel but I fail to see how setResponsePage(>>) is necessary for this. The only reason iirc to generify
component is to remove the casts for
here declares he's using generics, but then inserts a raw type of a
known generic type - a situation that should not happen.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
-igor
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
since then the thread
second gives warnings only in code that is not properly generified...
Regards,
Sebastiaan
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i do like generics. did i ever say otherwise? the problem here is that
if we scope something
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
i do like generics. did i ever say otherwise? the problem here is that
if we scope something as Class then even though
you ARE using generics in your code you will still get a warning
because we did not scope the class as Class>.
on the other hand if we do scope it as Class
orces is that it must now be a generic class which is annoying.
Not
to mention that in that area eclipse and javac accept different
things
So or we in wicket dont use any where and have supress warning
everywhere for that or we do use it and then suddenly it is in my
eyes
restricte
e do use it and then suddenly it is in my eyes
restricted to much.
I don't understand
On 5/14/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Johan Compagner wrote:
yes thats the reason
you are calling the method add with a generified component but that
container itself is not gen
Johan Compagner wrote:
yes thats the reason
you are calling the method add with a generified component but that
container itself is not generified
i dont like this about generics expecially the onces like this:
add(MarkupContainer container)
then suddenly a none generified component cant be a
I made a JIRA for this (with patch).
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1603
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2) using a special RequestCodingStrateg
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2) using a special RequestCodingStrategy, i.e.
UnmountedRequestCodingStrategy and tweaking isWicketRequest to return false
if it detects this request coding strategy...
What do you guys
up being ugly string compares)...
The second solution is cleaner in my opinion and it would allow you to
"unmount" or mount as a "pass through" specific urls...
What do you guys think?
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Hi,
I've got a page mounted on "/path1".
I've got some files in a directory in my webapp root on "/path1/dir"
How can I tell Wicket to give control back to the servlet container for
dir? Currently (even using QueryStringUrlCodingStrategy) the mount eats
/path1/dir and doesn't let me access th
Hi,
I've got a bit of strange error which I don't understand. I'm using the
tomcat sysdeo plugin to start my Wicket webapp (which I always do in
development), but all of a sudden for this webapp I get that it starts
and immediately stops again.
If I do "update context" the webapp is reloaded
[ ] IDataProvider
[X] Iterator> , drop model
[ ] Leave as is.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Jan Kriesten wrote:
Hi,
I have a usecase where the current proposed generic Interface for
IDataProvider with upcoming v1.4 of Wicket would break the
implementation concept working with Wicket 1.3. The usecase
Erik van Oosten wrote:
Johan Compagner wrote:
So then we should give a Page a locale field.
I am in favour of doing this, even if Sebastiaan's problem is solved
differently. I have a part of my site that is multilingual (the public
pages), and another part is not (the admin screens, in English)
ld be weird if the next page you go to is
suddenly in German, even if your session locale is German...
2) if it is not explicitly the session locale should be used...
Regards,
Sebastiaan
johan
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Johan Compagner
Nope, no questions, readable enough. I'll give it a shot in my
application Thanks a lot!
Btw: do you have a change locale link? How do you make sure it plays
nice with bookmarkable urls? I was thinking of using a redirect if the
page is bookmarkable, but haven't worked it out yet...
Than
Hmm.. Scala :-)
I guess I'll opt for English then :-)
I don't quite understand what you do... taking it out of the filter is
easy enough I guess, but then? When you set a property on the
application how does this work with different threads? Do you use thread
local? Then you do you render the
;s weird that I cannot mount 2 locales of a page on two
different paths... leading to the crawler and reference issues I
mentioned before... What the best solution is, is probably something
that needs to be discussed further. :-)
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Regards,
Sebastiaan
johan
On Mon, Apr 14,
Hi Jan,
Would you be willing to share that code? Because in the short term I
think it's the best solution.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Jan Kriesten wrote:
hi sebastiaan,
Any ideas on this? Anybody already implemented the coding strategy for
the locale in the root? Anybody got another easier worka
Gwyn Evans wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
However they're still workarounds for something that I think is
conceptually not quite right in Wicket currently: the fact that it should be
possible to mount different locales o
Hi,
Any reason why the filename field in DynamicWebResource does not at
least have a protected getter so you can use it in subclasses without
having to add the field again?
Regards,
Sebastiaan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Hi,
I have localized my Wicket site, but I have a problem with localization
+ (mounted) bookmarkable pages.
When mounting a bookmarkable page:
mount(new WhateverUrlCodingStrategy("/mypage", MyPage.class));
there is no locale parameter...
This means:
1) I cannot give my stat
id incompatibility issues?
public List getSorts() {
return state.getSorts();
}
public SortParam getSort() {
return (state.getSorts().isEmpty()) ? null :
state.getSorts().get(0);
}
-Original Message-----
From: Sebastiaan van Erk [mail
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 9:23 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: RE: SingleSortState multiple sorts?
Ironically, your code looks very similar to what I have done on my end. Can we
create a feature request for this?
-Original Message-
From: Sebastiaan van Erk
I wanted to have this the other day, so I came up with (see attached).
I'd like to see your ideas about it, since this was just a 20 minute
first hack...
IClusterable is just a tagging interface for the sole purpose of
clustering via Terracotta. So if you don't need TC, then Serializable
shou
This is elementary Java... you should probably use an IDE like eclipse,
works much better than finding errors later on with a build tool like
ant. You're declaring a method and you don't declare it's return type...
add the workd "void" before validate... the compiler gives you the exact
locatio
absolute URL's (for example
in emails) will be wrong.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Hi,
Jeremy Levy wrote:
I have been having trouble with this for a couple of months, it seems
that
redirects in Wicket 1.3.x seem to be writing out the URL incorrectly
in our
set up.
We a
Hi,
Jeremy Levy wrote:
I have been having trouble with this for a couple of months, it seems that
redirects in Wicket 1.3.x seem to be writing out the URL incorrectly in our
set up.
We are running JBoss 4.2 with embedded Tomcat 5.5 using Apache/2.2.4 with
mod_proxy.
The Tomcat URL for the appl
intuitive...
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
the "workaround" is quiet easy
class mypage extends webpage {
onbeforerender() {
if (get("panel1")==null) {
add(newPanel1("panel1"));
}
super.onbeforerender();
}
}
-igor
On Thu,
Gerolf Seitz wrote:
> you can provide factory methods in your base page like
> protected abstract Component newHeader(String id, IModel model);
>
> in the constructor of base page do:
> add(newHeader("header", someModelOrNull));
>
> and just override/implement the factory method in your concrete p
from book writing
- web framework shoot out: jsf vs tapestry vs wicket vs spring mvc
- top 10 ways to mess up your Wicket application
- top 10 ways to speed up your Wicket application
- scaling out (show how to run your wicket application in a cluster)
Martijn
On 3/18/08, Sebastiaan van E
at *are* people interested in having presented? If
there is something that I feel is within my Wicket skills, who knows. :-)
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
I see that you haven't volunteered yet to present something.
Martijn
On 3/18/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECT
Since it's pretty close, I was wondering if there is anything known about:
1) what time does it start?
2) what presentations are being held?
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Yes, it is tuesday april 8th.
Martijn
On 3/18/08, Uwe Schäfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hi
is there a
erything in wicket can be bookmarkable and not everything can be
statelesss. None of the ajax examples could work on stateless pages
for example.
-Matej
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matej Knopp wrote:
> > Why can&#
Regards,
Sebastiaan
-Matej
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Making the source code viewing pages stateless won't help: next
> question: but when I close the source code, my page doesn't work
>
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Making the source code viewing pages stateless won't help: next
question: but when I close the source code, my page doesn't work
anymore.
The source code opens up in separate window. If the URL's there were
bookmarkable pages they would always work. Since the source is
Yes, or just even increase the timeout as a temporary fix. :-)
It's like 5 minutes now, which means that if you go to your own code to
implement something like in the example, and then want to view the
source code of the next logical file, it says "page expired". If it was
30 minutes, then for
[X] +1, Wicket 1.4 is 1.3 + generics, drop support for 1.3
Regards,
Sebastiaan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Johan Compagner wrote:
dont think you can compile java 5 source (with generics) to 1.4
you have to use something like retroweaver then
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering to what extent it is possible to have generics added to
1.3
Hi,
I was wondering to what extent it is possible to have generics added to
1.3 but have it compile to 1.4 if necessary? Isn't that a just a
question of not using other Java 1.5 constructs such as enums and new
JDK classes? Wouldn't that solve most people's problems that need to
stick to Java
Hi,
I was actually trying to use getPageParameters() as well, and it was
returning null too...
The reason I want to use it is, I have a base page which adds a "context
panel" fragment in the page, which it gets by an abstract method
"getContextPanel()". Now in the sub page I wanted to use th
Ok. :-) Just put it on here before reporting in the jira just in case
it's was a stupid idea. ;-)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-1427
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
jira...
-igor
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
Is it possible to make setAfterDisabledLink on AbstractLink return
"this" so that chaining is possible. Now I have somthing similar to the
following:
fragment.add(new BookmarkablePageLink("season2Link",
ProgramsPage.class, new PageParameters("0=2008")) {
{
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
How's this:
public class RecursiveStringResourceModel extends AbstractReadOnlyModel {
private final String resourceKey;
private final Component component;
public RecursiveStringResourceModel(final String resourceKey, final
Component comp
How's this:
public class RecursiveStringResourceModel extends AbstractReadOnlyModel {
private final String resourceKey;
private final Component component;
public RecursiveStringResourceModel(final String resourceKey, final
Component component) {
Frank van Lankvelt wrote:
ok, I'll go ahead with storing the object in the session directly (as
meta-data) and use models in the pages to access this object.
May I ask what your use case is?
it's very simple; when carrying out an action on page A, I want to
display a modal window ("are you sur
Frank van Lankvelt wrote:
Assuming B has a reference to Page A, wont A be Serialized with B,
when you go to C, and both still share the same serialized object?
When B is serialized, so is A, and serialization makes sure the
instances to your object are kept shared
how can this be? Aren't
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Maurice Marrink wrote:
Assuming B has a reference to Page A, wont A be Serialized with B,
when you go to C, and both still share the same serialized object?
When B is serialized, so is A, and serialization makes sure the
instances to your object are kept shared
Maurice Marrink wrote:
Assuming B has a reference to Page A, wont A be Serialized with B,
when you go to C, and both still share the same serialized object?
When B is serialized, so is A, and serialization makes sure the
instances to your object are kept shared
But when A is serialized a
At one point I wanted to do interpolation in constant strings, so I just
used the property interpolator directly:
PropertyVariableInterpolator.interpolate(value, modelObject);
You can use that to build a model that recursively interpolates until
there are no more ${...} occurrences in the valu
I just remember Johan gave a presentation about this at the last WUG in
Amsterdam:
http://www.slideshare.net/jcompagner/session-stores-page-maps-and-pages
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Sam Hough wrote:
Dear All,
I'm trying to get a better understanding off when/how/where Wicket
serialises components a
Look for page store in the archives and the IPageStore interface.
To get your application to deserialize stuff, simply press the back
button on a wicket page, and click on a wicket link in the resulting
page. That should get your page loaded from the page store.
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Sam Hough
I posted the problem to their support forum, hopefully it will help. :-)
http://www.nabble.com/Double-posts-to-mailing-lists-due-to-edits-on-nabble-to16000975.html
Regards,
Sebastiaan
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On 3/12/08, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Considering the num
Considering the number of times certain questions are asked on this list
that are answered 1000 times in the archive, I'm kind of afraid this
isn't really going to help (unless it's posted frequently).
Is it not possible for nabble to disable the edit function for
specifically the wicket lists
Gerolf Seitz wrote:
how about boolean WebPage#isAutoFocusEnabled and the possibility
to provide several IFocusStrategy instances with different priority?
this would allow to eg only set the focus on the first formcomponent of the
first form if no other formcomponent has an error...
I like somet
Sebastiaan van Erk wrote:
Johan Compagner wrote:
i still think that behaviors to control focus is a bit wrong
focus should have 1 entry point
I agree.
and i guess that is WebPage.focusComponent()
I agree on that one too.
or maybe Form (but you could have 2)
Exactly, so not a good idea
Johan Compagner wrote:
i still think that behaviors to control focus is a bit wrong
focus should have 1 entry point
I agree.
and i guess that is WebPage.focusComponent()
I agree on that one too.
or maybe Form (but you could have 2)
Exactly, so not a good idea. The page should determine
/08, Edvin Syse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wow, that's a very nice solution. Thanks :))
-- Edvin
Sebastiaan van Erk skrev:
I would say that the standard practice is probably to use your logging
> subsystem to email you the exception.
>
> For example, if you are using lo
I would say that the standard practice is probably to use your logging
subsystem to email you the exception.
For example, if you are using log4j to log, you could add something like
this to your log4j.xml file:
I think he means that, suppose you have a username and password field;
then if the username is already filled in (e.g. from a cookie), then
focus should go to the next field (password field).
It probably should be the same as the tab order (first empty field in
tab order gets focus) from a ui
Hi,
Igor Vaynberg wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 4:42 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The form with the token looks good, the question I have is, why is
something like it not the default (since almost everybody's site will be
vulnerable without it)?
becau
James Carman wrote:
The problem with this approach is that you're not able to localize the
title if you hard-code it. What I've done is actually specify a key
for my messages file and I use that. So, every page has to define its
page.title key in its PageClass.properties file.
That's what I
I do basically the same thing, but since the title does not change on my
pages I see no need to have a (dynamic) model for the property, plus I
just use the constructor to set it, which saves some loc. In other words:
public abstract class BasePage extends WebPage
{
// ...
public BasePage(S
the normal form get then also still
works but i am not sure
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Wicket does nothing to protect from CSRF attacks, and it is trivially
vulnerable. Sure it's a lot more difficult with the standard
?wicket:int
Hi,
Nino Saturnino Martinez Vazquez Wael wrote:
As with all thing's you can make them more or less secure. As stated
before, depending on a level of paranoia nothing are secure!
But that's got nothing to do with the question: does Wicket offer
security feature X? Nor does it help answer the f
s, so vulnerable to CSRF
attacks.
I want to emphasize that I think that these tasks (avoid CSRF attacks, to
offer confidentiality, avoid tampering data in forms) would must be resolved
by default by frameworks like Wicket to offer "a security framework".
Arthur.
2008/3/4, Sebastiaan
The point of CSRF attack is that you *DONT* have to hijack the session.
By including for example an image on the attacking website with a src
reference to the vulnerable website, the browser load the page of
vulnerable website, and if you currently have a session, the browser
will be tricked i
Wicket does nothing to protect from CSRF attacks, and it is trivially
vulnerable. Sure it's a lot more difficult with the standard
?wicket:interface type URLs than it would be with more predictable URLs,
but you can still quite easily guess the URLs, and futhermore, to
improve your chances of s
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
