Can I annotate an attribute to tell Skyve not to create a database entry? (the value is transient and makes no sense storing it).
yes
<text name="myValue" persistent="false">
<displayName>My Value</displayName>
typically in this case you will probably also want to turn off auditing and dirty tracking
<text name="myValue" persistent="false" audited="false" trackChanges="false">
<displayName>My Value</displayName>
...
You can also make an entire document transient by not including the persistent declaration in the document, i.e. by removing this bit...
<persistent name="MyTableName" />
Note that if you make the whole document not persistent, then the permissions for the document in the module declaration no longer should include "CRUD..." as these are database specific - so normally for transient documents, you would assign a permission like
<role name="DataEntry">
<description><![CDATA[Creates, maintains and enters data]]></description>
<privileges>
<document name="MyDocument" permission="_____"/>
...
Related
I have a custom component for text input and each of them has an internal field ID'ed as data. It causes the warning below to appear.
[DOM] Found 13 elements with non-unique id #data
I'm clear on why it happens and I understand that's a warning not an actual error. I also recognize the appropriateness of an ID being unique (in its scope).
I'm not entirely sure regarding the implications in my particular case. In my opinion, warnings are tolerable but not acceptable.
Is there a best-practice approach to get rid of the error? By the very concept of a GP component, some parts will be alike in each instance. Or is there a trick to unique'fy the IDs? Or perhaps a directive or such to let Angular know we're cool with the state as is?
The component uses #ViewChild("data") to refer the input control in the template below.
<div id="outer">
...
<label for="data">{{label}}</label>
<input #data id="data" ... >
<div *ngFor="let error of errors" class="row"> ... </div>
</div>
As far as I understand the purpose of using ids is querying it inside of Angular. You could use a directive or another attribute to query without any warnings. Also you could make a kind of wrapper which would apply common ID to input and its label and just concat UUID and ID you want to use. But if it's only about querying just choose another attribute. For example data-id or data-qa whatever gives you an ability to query and have no errors at the same time. Just in case #ViewChild("data") refers to #data and not id="data" whilst you may wrap input with label tag.
In backoffice, for B2BUnit and B2BCustomer models, There are some important attributes that are displaying under "Administration" tab.
But I would like to show it under "Properites" or "General" tab. What configuration I need to change?
I hope you already have a custom backoffice extension, if not then follow this tutorial to create one.
Now, In your custom backoffice extension, you can find the file *backoffice-backoffice-config.xml. In this file, you can define how & where you want to populate your custom attribute. You need to declare it for the editor-area component like below.
<context merge-by="type" parent="Customer" type="B2BCustomer" component="editor-area">
<editorArea:editorArea xmlns:editorArea="http://www.hybris.com/cockpitng/component/editorArea">
<editorArea:tab xmlns="http://www.hybris.com/cockpitng/component/editorArea" name="hmc.properties">
<section name="hmc.section.your.custom.section">
<attribute qualifier="yourAttribute"/>
</section>
</editorArea:tab>
</editorArea:editorArea>
</context>
Here you can define the new custom section (hmc.section.your.custom.section) or use any existing section name. For the custom section, you need to define its value in the in labels_en.properties (like a way for each language labels_*.properties) file.
EDIT - THIS IS A COMPLETE RED HERRING. One of the user properties down the hierarchy had the readOnly property set for user. This was preventing it propagating.
I am struggling to understand databinding and how values propagate when the property changes I have a tree structured set of elements (the structure is spread across separate element definitions - not with <content> tags as possibly implied by the structure show below)
<my-app user="{{user}}">
<my-session user="{{user}}">
<my-login user="{{user}}"></my-login>
</my-session>
<template is="dom-if" if="[[user.name]]">
<my-pages user="{{user}}">
<iron-pages>
<my-menu user="{{user}}"></my-menu>
<my-reports user="{{user}}"></my-reports>
</iron-pages>
</my-pages>
</template>
</my-app>
Each of these elements at their different definitions define a property
user : {
type: Object,
notify: true
}
And all the elements are linked with two way data binding
<my-pages> is lazy loaded using importHref after the user has logged on (and therefore user.name is defined)
I have a property of user called keys which is used for access control. In particular both <my-menu> and a sub element of <my-reports> uses this to determine which menu items to display.
This all works fine on initial log on. But if I change the logged on user, then this change to the user property is apparently not propagating properly
What I can see is that from the debugger triggered during a page change from iron pagess I can see that the <my-app> 's user has the new logged on user value BUT <my-pages>'s user has the old user. For some reason data binding of user is not working down the tree structure, even though it appears to have successfully propagated up from <my-login> to <my-app>. .
I am assuming that possibly the "object" of user is not changing only the paths. I am getting confused about what I should be doing here. Can someone help.
Really cannot tell what's wrong with your code with the information that you have provided except for the syntax error where instead of closing my-pages you have started a new one, but here's a plunker emulating your code. I was able to successfully change the user for all the elements.
I started short time ago with JSP, JSTL, HTML and JavaScript so here is my problem:
I need to set the value of a var the value of an input hidden. Other option is if it possible to compare using
<c:if test="....">
the value of a variable that I sent with the request with the value of the hidden input.
Thanks.
Update
I've been trying but can't make it work.
I have this field that contains the id of and object. I also have the list with the objects so what I have to do is find the object related to that ID.
<input type="text" name="id1" />
but if I do this:
<c:set var="dd" value="${param.id1}" />
<input type="text" value="${dd}" />
The input text is empty but the text related to id1 displays 850 (i.e. the value is dinamic)
Any suggestion why is not working?
Update 2
I need the "multipart/form-data" because in the form I need to upload a picture. I understand how to get the parameters from Java, but since I'm not using the server but the JSP pages, there's any way to do it? Just need to read that input element and save it in a variable.
You can access request parameters by implicit ${param} variable.
E.g. http://example.com/context/page.jsp?foo=bar in combination with
<c:if test="${param.foo == 'bar'}">
The foo's param value is bar!
</c:if>
<c:if test="${param.foo != 'bar'}">
The foo's param value is not bar, it is: ${param.foo}
</c:if>
would show the first condition.
If you actually want to retain some hidden input element in subsequent requests (which wasn't really made clear in your question), then all you basically need to do is:
<input type="hidden" name="foo" value="${param.foo}">
Update: as per your update: you need to give the input element a name as well. Thus, e.g.
<input type="text" name="id1" value="${param.id1}" />
This way it's available by request.getParameter("id1") and inherently also ${param.id1}. Do you see it now?
Update 2: as per your comment here: certainly this is related to enctype="multipart/form-data". With this encoding, the request parameters aren't in the parameter map anymore, but instead in the request body, because of the mixup with binary data (file uploads). It's going to be a long story to explain it all, but basically you need to parse the request yourself. If you're on Servlet 2.5 or older, then the Apache Commons FileUpload is very helpful here. Read especially "User Guide" and "Frequently Asked Questions" over there to see code examples and to learn how to use it the right way (also in MSIE!). You can even decide to abstract the FileUpload away so that you can stick using HttpServletRequest#getParameter() and ${param} the usual way, also see this article.
If you're already on Servlet 3.0, then you can just make use of HttpServletRequest#getParts(). You can even abstract it away so that you can stick using HttpServletRequest#getParameter() and ${param} the usual way, also see this article.
Update 3: Oh, you really don't want to use JSP to do all the processing. There it is not for. It's high time to learn Servlet. Besides, when using a Filter which puts all parameters from the request body back in the request parameter map (as described in the both articles), you also don't necessarily need a Servlet after all.
I am looking for a mechanism to transform dataobjects into HTML. The elements in the dataobject are of both, simple and complex types. I have tried playing with HtmlTextWriter for rendering but got stuck with complex types.
Mine is an ASP.Net website project. I have to avoid using server side controls (and therefore do away with built in binding capabilities) as the front end processing is done with the help of jQuery. I need to just churn out basic HTML for my dataobjects and the rest of enrichment (content arrangement and styling) will be done at the frontend.
I am looking for a simple solution (I found Spring.Net an overkill and overwhelming and NHAML also very confusing).
Further, my application is expected to grow over a period of time so I need to have some respect for performance. Therefore I am avoiding bringing XML/XSLT in the picture.
For eg. A Person object will be something like this:
String: Name
Int: Age
Complex Type: Address (includes Street, City, Zip)
Array of Type "Qualification" : Qualifications (includes Degree, Passing Year, Grades)
Desired output is:
<p id="userName" class="userName">John</p>
<p id="age" class="age">35</p>
<div id="address" class="address">
<p id="street" class="street">Express Highway</p>
<p id="city" class="city">Mumbai</p>
<p id="zip" class="zip">400101</p>
</div>
<div id="qualifications" class="qualifications">
<div id="qualification1" class="qualification">
<p id="degree1" class="degree">B.Sc.</p>
<p id="year1" class="year">1990</p>
<p id="grade1" class="grade">A</p>
</div>
<div id="qualification2" class="qualification">
<p id="degree2" class="degree">M.Sc.</p>
<p id="year2" class="year">1992</p>
<p id="grade2" class="grade">A</p>
</div>
</div>
A point to note here is that a mapper would be required to map the properties from the source dataobject, add some metadata to it (like HTML element attributes, etc) and then carry out the transformation.
I'm looking at it as a design problem and elaborate answer on much higher perspective that is design and not the code! The correct way to do this would be as following.
Person type is holding the information and it is data-centric so I recommend not to put any html-rendering responsibility into this class.
First you will need to have an abstract base-class for all your business/data objects. Let us assume [becuase you'll need to have it] BusinessBase.
So you should start writing a server-control that derives from System.Web.UI.WebContorl. Expose a property that takes an object of type BusinessBase in it's set accessor.
Now you need define some custom Attributes that is applied to properties of any sub-class of type BusinessBase. This attribute holds the renderring output information for that particular property of the business/data object. Decorate all properties which you want to be renderred in html.
Come back to your web-server-control and via use reflection to iterate through all properties [having your custom-attribute] of object which has been assigned to the server control property of type BusinessBase. Render the html as per the attribute.
Now use this web-server-control and business object in your asp.net front-ends. Have fun.
This is a high-level design. You'll need to be more discrete and
specific in your attribute as to what
html rendering is generated for the
business object.
Have you benchmarked XmlSerializer or DataContractSerializer (faster) together with xslt transformations, since you're dismissing them off the bat?
If you still consider xslt to be too slow for your server, let the client render it as xhtml. Then the cpu "burden" is distributed to all your users.
A tutorial can be found at w3schools.com.
It's wise to think about scaling for the future, but you shouldn't dismiss an obvious technology and solution before you actually know it will be the bottleneck.
You should also calculate the cost of adding another front-end server compared to going a more complicated programmatic route. You can also look into caching to improve performance.
[Edit]
Another solution is to implement a WriteHtml method for each class, and from your top class you will call all your child writers. Hand-rolled and effective (but takes more management since you must update the writer if you add a property).
class Person
{
public void WriteHtml(Stream writeStream);
{
writeStream.Write( "<p id="userName" class="userName">{0}</p>", UserName );
etc.
Adress.WriteHtml(writeStream);
writeStream.Write( "<div id="address" class="address">" );
foreach( Address ad in Adresses ) ad.WriteHtml(writeStream);
writeStream.Write( "</div>" );
}
}
You could also override ToString() in each class to return the html representation, and use that instead.
Since you state that classes are simple it should be maintainble and readable, but I still favor xslt, as it's easier to change without recompile. And the most complex render part you ahve is to render your Container tags, since you keep Arrays of objects. If you implemented a Collection class for them, then you could maintain the Container tags in that class instead.
class Person
{
AddressCollection Adresses;
// instead of
Adress[] Adresses;
}
Then the question is, what do you consider "simple" :D