Hello Victor,
Thursday, January 31, 2002, 8:19:44 PM, you wrote:
VS> GenericValidator.validate(this,formName,getLocale());
VS> This simple call will validate your form according to your formproc form
VS> definition based on the formName you specify. Upon returning, if there was
VS> an error,
Victor Salaman wrote:
> formproc has the concept of defining a form in an xml file, so I created
> a GenericValidator class that can be invoked from any action that
> extends ActionSupport, like this.. inside your doValidation() just have
> a single line:
>
> GenericValidator.validate(this,fo
Is'nt this the wrong order? Should'nt WebWork first try to use the
appropriate setters and getters and only directly access parameters, if
those methods don't exist?
Ralf
Toby Hede wrote:
> I think I have sorted my parameter issues, and because this is
> probably documented somewhere I feel
Toby Hede wrote:
> Can you clarify what you mean by: 'having one action internally delegate
> to the chain of actions that you want to execute'.
Have one action which in doExecute does something like:
Action1 action1 = (Action1)ActionFactory.getAction(Action1.class);
action1.setA(b);
action1.e
that also works .
>
>Can you clarify what you mean by: 'having one action internally delegate to
>the chain of actions that you want to execute'.
>
>Thanks for the assistance guys, gotta love Open Source!
>
>
>
>
>
>>From: Rickard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
;.
Thanks for the assistance guys, gotta love Open Source!
>From: Rickard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [Webwork-user] command driven actions
>Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 10:09:47 +0100
>
>Toby Hede wrote:
>
>>I
>
>Well, that's not true. You can call "isCommand()" to determine
>which command is being invoked.
>
Hmm... this must me something new, as this was not in there originally. This
being the case, I see no problem in automatically calling validate from
execute in all cases (cda/non cda).
>
>>I ha
+1
>
> I have recently done integration with formproc. Amazingly it's just one
> class and requires no changes to WW. I'll commit tonight if you guys like
> the idea.
>
> /V
>
>
>
> _
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile
Victor Salaman wrote:
>> The current code only calls validation if no command is set. Hm.. maybe
>> this should be changed... what do ya'll think?
>
> -1 ... Each command could require different validations, and given the
> fact that you can't call something like getCommand, there would no way
>
>
>The current code only calls validation if no command is set. Hm.. maybe
>this should be changed... what do ya'll think?
>
>
-1 ... Each command could require different validations, and given the fact
that you can't call something like getCommand, there would no way to detect
from where are
Then, +1. Go ahead.
> -Original Message-
> From: Rickard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 10:30 AM
> To: Kjetil Paulsen
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Webwork-user] command driven actions
>
>
> Kjetil Paulsen wrote:
&
Kjetil Paulsen wrote:
>>The current code only calls validation if no command is set.
>>Hm.. maybe
>>this should be changed... what do ya'll think?
>
> Is there a reason not to?
Well, if the validation is specific to doExecute() it's bad. But, since
we now have "isCommand()" it should be poss
> The current code only calls validation if no command is set.
> Hm.. maybe
> this should be changed... what do ya'll think?
Is there a reason not to?
/kjeilhp
___
Webwork-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listi
Toby Hede wrote:
> I have a couple of queries about command driven actions.
>
> My commands are working fine, I implement CommandDriven, but I am
> finding a couple of things:
> - parameters are not being set
Hm.. they should be... strange..
> - validation is not occurring
The current cod
you can chain your actions by setting another action as the
'success' result.
/kjetilhp
> -Original Message-
> From: Toby Hede [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 6:11 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Webwork-user] command driven action
Well, now it does ;-)
Thx, Sven
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Im Auftrag von Matt
> Baldree
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. Januar 2002 01:15
> An: Sven Kuenzler; Webwork-User
> Betreff: Re: [Webwork-user] Comma
I have a couple of queries about command driven actions.
My commands are working fine, I implement CommandDriven, but I am finding a
couple of things:
- parameters are not being set
- validation is not occurring
I have overcome these issues by implmenting Parameter aware to retirve
parameters
Does your action implement CommandDriven?
- Original Message -
From: "Sven Kuenzler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Webwork-User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 5:11 PM
Subject: [Webwork-user] Command driven actions and actions.xml
Hello!
I am running into a problem configuring a command driven action in
actions.xml. My config file looks like this:
xslt/norm.xsl
xslt/search2.xsl
xslt/copy.xsl
When hitting http://host/context/StandardSearch.action, WebWork calls
Search2.doExecute().
19 matches
Mail list logo
