I'm concerned that IBinding doesn't provide enough data to do this properly.

You can't get the type of property a binding is connected to.

This would not be difficult to implement for most of the binding types
(i.e., a MessageBinding is always a String, an AssetBinding is always
an IAsset).

For the workhorse, ExpressionBinding (i.e., OGNL), this is not so
good. I don't know that OGNL has the ability to provide the type of a
property, short of reading it. And if the property is currently null,
that leaves you with very little.

I supposed OGNL could be extended to provide this behavior, but it
would be tricky and may be limited to declared types rather than
actual types. Again, many pitfalls there.

On 4/3/06, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like it. Along the same lines I was thinking that the translator parameter
> could be dropped in favor of an implied/inferred target translation type
> which would handle the "majority" of cases.
>
> As always, anything that makes my lazy fingers type less code is a huge +1
> from me :)
>
> On 4/3/06, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I've been thinking of ways to reduce the amount of typing/XML when
> > building Tapestry pages. It's more of the "convention" style of
> > development.
> >
> > For example; the value parameter of a form element (TextField,
> > TextArea, etc.) is required.  Often, not always, but often, the
> > component id matches the name of a property of the encloding page or
> > component.
> >
> > I think that you should be able to omit the value binding in that
> > case, and let the TextField figure it out.  What the exact (flexible,
> > extensible) mechanism is for this, I'm not sure.
> >
> > Likewise, Form's should look for listener methods "doSuccess",
> > "doCancel", "doSubmit" as defaults for the corresponding pararameters.
> >
> > DirectLink should look for a "doFoo" listener method as the default
> > for its listener parameter (where "Foo" is the capitalization of its
> > component id).
> >
> > I think we could come up with defaults for displayName on TextField
> > and friends as well.  Any others jump to mind?
> >
> > So, the wiring of a parameter is based on
> > 1) Explicit binding
> > 2) Autowiring
> > 3) default-value
> > 4) Failure
> >
> >
> > --
> > Howard M. Lewis Ship
> > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
> > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind
> >
> > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
> > and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jesse Kuhnert
> Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer
>
> Open source based consulting work centered around
> dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind.  http://opennotion.com
>
>


--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
Creator, Jakarta Tapestry
Creator, Jakarta HiveMind

Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support
and project work.  http://howardlewisship.com

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

Reply via email to