RE: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-19 Thread Stijn Christiaens
ly to use > the most recent 5 or so of them. In practice, I've found a page memory of 10 > is almost always big enough. > > --- Pat > > > -Original Message- > > From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Robert Zeigler
steners themselves. Six of one, half dozen of the other I suppose, --- Pat -Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raul Raja Martinez Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 10:06 AM To: tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: ActionLink

RE: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Patrick Casey
dnesday, January 18, 2006 10:06 AM > To: tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org > Subject: Re: ActionLink and DirectLink > > Do you mean the DataSqueezer? > > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-tapestry/DataSqueezer > > > > Martin Strand wrote: > > I often find myself doing this

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Jesse Kuhnert
a page memory > > of 10 > > is almost always big enough. > > > > --- Pat > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:50 AM > >> To: Tapestry us

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Raul Raja Martinez
rver side memory when the user is only likely to use the most recent 5 or so of them. In practice, I've found a page memory of 10 is almost always big enough. --- Pat -Original Message- From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Robert Zeigler
ng up server side memory when the user is only likely to use the most recent 5 or so of them. In practice, I've found a page memory of 10 is almost always big enough. --- Pat -Original Message- From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 1

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Martin Strand
em. In practice, I've found a page memory of 10 is almost always big enough. --- Pat -Original Message- From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:50 AM To: Tapestry users Subject: ActionLink and DirectLink Hello everybody, previous

RE: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Patrick Casey
From: Stijn Christiaens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:50 AM > To: Tapestry users > Subject: ActionLink and DirectLink > > Hello everybody, > > previously I used ActionLink to do my dirty work, but it seems that this > is not such a safe

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Norbert Sándor
]> To: "Tapestry users" Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:20 PM Subject: Re: ActionLink and DirectLink That sounds like a good idea. But is the data in these fields not also passed in the URL? On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 12:59 +0100, Norbert Sándor wrote: Maybe embed those components

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Stijn Christiaens
Original Message - > From: "Stijn Christiaens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Tapestry users" > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 12:50 PM > Subject: ActionLink and DirectLink > > > > Hello everybody, > > > > previously I used ActionL

Re: ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Norbert Sándor
Maybe embed those components in a Form... So big objects will be stored in hidden fields. BR, Norbi - Original Message - From: "Stijn Christiaens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tapestry users" Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 12:50 PM Subject: ActionLink and Dir

ActionLink and DirectLink

2006-01-18 Thread Stijn Christiaens
Hello everybody, previously I used ActionLink to do my dirty work, but it seems that this is not such a safe approach. In transferring to DirectLink I am a little bit unsure about how to continue. I use my DirectLink with a listener and parameters. Unfortunately, the parameter Object I have to pas