ow i can see now why it used *.tml
thnx nick for showing me the link
Nick Westgate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Marketing eh? Interesting idea.
Here are the actual reasons from the dev list discussion:
http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--T5-template-extension-change-tf4502622.html
"
1) Use the
Cookies in app-filter in AppModule not working(not saved):
running:
_cookies.writeCookieValue("erweter","xxx"); - get exception \/
_cookies.writeCookieValue("erweter","xxx","/abc/"); - is ok but not working
Exception:
00:12:42.703 ERROR! [SocketListener0-1]
org.apache.tapestry.internal.services.
We've been using serialize + gzip + base64 encode using T3 for a couple of
years - never had an issue with performance at all ...
- Original Message -
From: "Howard Lewis Ship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tapestry users"
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: Comparison
Thanks for that fantastic reply. Yes, in fact, the Component annotation is
exactly what I was missing. Don't know why I didn't see it before...
And that Input Validate page you refered me to is quite a help. Reading
avidly.
Thanks!
Marc
- Original Message -
From: "lasitha" <[EMAIL
Heh. See!? I told you it should be configurable. ;)
christian.
On 29-Sep-07, at 2:08 PM, Chris Lewis wrote:
I didn't realize that it was a (partial) attempt at preventing the
container from serving them as static. However, "Use the extension
".tml" (Tapestry Markup Language)" confirms tha
If you switch to a 5.0.6 snapshot, yes.
Cheers,
Nick.
Chris Lewis wrote:
I didn't realize that it was a (partial) attempt at preventing the
container from serving them as static. However, "Use the extension
".tml" (Tapestry Markup Language)" confirms that there is at least some
degree of bra
I was offering you a pragmatic reason for avoiding broken html at all
costs. I am not arguing and was certainly not insulting you.
Penyihir Kecil wrote:
i'm not saying i like unclosed tag
we're not work alone man...
when you're work on team
everything could be happenned
it's not about smart or
I didn't realize that it was a (partial) attempt at preventing the
container from serving them as static. However, "Use the extension
".tml" (Tapestry Markup Language)" confirms that there is at least some
degree of branding. Many frameworks do this (rhtml anyone?), and
probably for several rea
Marketing eh? Interesting idea.
Here are the actual reasons from the dev list discussion:
http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--T5-template-extension-change-tf4502622.html
"
1) Use the extension ".tml" (Tapestry Markup Language) for Tapestry
templates, rather than ".html". This reflects the goal of us
Hello Marc,
I think you want the @Component annotation instead of
@InjectComponent. The latter is "Used exclusively inside a mixin to
connect the mixin to the component to which it is attached."[1]
I haven't tested whether this will solve your problem, but it seems likely.
A good starting point
i'm not saying i like unclosed tag
we're not work alone man...
when you're work on team
everything could be happenned
it's not about smart or dumb (sorry)
just my humble opinion
and also i think
you don't have to personal attacking me
it just my opinion about tapestry
not personal attacking
you
If you're only real concern is that fact that you have to have
well-formed documents, I'd suggest you examine your coding practices.
Having unclosed tags is not smart as it will break the rendering. As far
as *tml, I agree its annoying and its most likely named that for
marketing reasons, but I
Hi all,
I am trying to understand how to implement custom validation of form fields.
Here's what I've got so far:
CreateAccount.java:
public class CreateAccount {
@InjectComponent
private Form createAccountForm;
@OnEvent(value = "validate", component = "createAccountForm")
void v
dunno why but i'm little bothered by the new concept
of tapestry 5 based on xml
if it's true...then
it will has strict rules when writing html tag
it has to be xml rules not html
In a change from Tapestry 4, under Tapestry 5,
component templates are well formed XML documents.
That means that
My Start.java follows - note that *themes.default* is a symbol
contributed in my app module. It is valid as I am able to inject and
access it via a getter.
package com.propertypix.www.pages;
import org.apache.tapestry.Asset;
import org.apache.tapestry.annotations.Environmental;
import org.apac
Could we see your Start page?
On 9/28/07, Chris Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm creating something like DocumentScriptBuilder for inserting
> stylesheets, much like DocumentScriptBuilderImpl does for javascripts. I
> have this method in my app module, inspired by the method in
> Tapestry
Nick, thanks for pointing out the earlier e-mail.
Unfortunately, it doesn't deal with how to auto-reload html
templates. Tapestry5DevClassLoader only ensures class files are
reloaded.
Any other suggestions?
On 28/09/2007, at 9:24 PM, Nick Westgate wrote:
Geoff Callender wrote:
> T5 isn'
I agree with Jean-Philippe that a standard default page should be
supported. The package name may work, but I suspect that's actually a
bug rather than a feature. Even if it is a feature it is, in my opinion,
cumbersome. A standard default page name would be immediately
recognizable by a develo
If you give your page the same name as your package pages/product/Product.java
then you will be able to access it with "http://host/product/";.
You cant access it with "http://host/product"; tho, and in my opinion
you should be able to do that
See my JIRA
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAPEST
19 matches
Mail list logo
