Here's the deal.
1) I always recommend that you provide an explicit t:id for form fields,
rather than let Tapestry assign the id. In fact, I recommend assigning an
t:id to all non-trivial components.
2) Often, but far from always, you would end up using the same string in a
TextField for t:id and for the name of the property being edited (the
t:value parameter).
3) Thus the carrot: you can omit t:value when it will match t:id; the
TextField and similar components can default t:value based on t:id.
4) Don't fit that mold? Use an explicit t:value.
So this is bad from one philosophy: that there should only be one way to
accomplish any one goal.
But I think it is good in terms of making things Just Work, which I find to
be very pragmatic.
On 9/7/07, smithfox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I do more test based you simple.
> Yes, a nested class also work.
>
> As you said: It's not tapestry issue.
>
> Your code is:
> [Page.java]
> private BznsPojo pojo= new BznsPojo();
>
> My code is:
> [Page.java]
> private BznsPojo pojo;
>
> @BeginRender
> void beginRender(){
> pojo = createNewPojo();
> }
>
> private BznsPojo createNewPojo(){
> BznsPojo pojo = new BznsPojo();
> Product product = new Product();
> pojo.setProduct(product);
> return pojo;
> }
>
>
> So the problem is caused by lifecycle of pojo:
> I guess that pojo's nested field object have already referenced by page
> template before BeginRender( and SteupRender) event.
>
> So I change the code:
>
> My code is:
> [Page.java]
> @Retain
> private BznsPojo pojo;
>
> .....
>
>
> OK, It work.
>
> Thank for Filip's help.
>
>
>
>
> Filip S. Adamsen-2 wrote:
> >
> > I did a test, and it worked.
> >
> > Can you show me more of your source code? It might be some non-Tapestry
> > issue.
> >
> > smithfox skrev:
> >> Thank your very much.
> >> I test your code. It can pass.
> >>
> >> But my case is different with yours.
> >> Your business object is a simple POJO class.
> >> But if you add another business class to the simple POJO class as a
> >> field,
> >> the tapestry doesn't recognise it.
> >>
> >> "sale.date" can pass,
> >> But "sale.product.price" can't pass.
> >>
> >> You can do a test.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/T5%3A-How-to-bind-composite-class%27-field%28like-sale.product.price%29-in-page-template-tf4395512.html#a12555589
> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Partner and Senior Architect at Feature50
Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind
