Thanks for the response Chris. Rob Zeigler and myself dug in and
figured out a temporary workaround... by overriding (the internal and
subject to change) AjaxPartialResponseRenderer ... I didn't yet do
the elegance of making the change based on the requested Content-
Type, but that would be the logical next step.
The ugly part of the current hack, is that JSONObject is the
container that is passed through the whole rendering pipeline for the
AJAX stuff, which means we're not able to avoid passing it around,
but we just use the MarkupWriter from AjaxPartialResponseRenderer to
send to the Printstream instead of the JSONObject...
As for the JS side, I was doing that all with my own XHR code anyway,
in a script that I include on the necessary pages/components.
That evil "eval" was actually giving me the beachball on some of the
updates of larger more complex elements... so this was a must for
that...
Thanks for you suggestions! If you'd like me to file a JIRA I can
probably do so (though my experience attempting to file bugs in the
past was frustratingly painful... what can I say, I have thin skin... )
Steve
On Apr 27, 2008, at 3:07:30, Chris Lewis wrote:
Hi Steven,
Regarding c):
I was just about to respond telling you that you can return AJAXObject
or an injected block (mark up), and it will work fine, and then I
realized that even markup is wrapped in a JSON envelope. I don't think
this can be changed without changing some T5 code - even if you could
replace the relevant handlers via module contributions (probable), you
still can't affect the JS that handles the responses (or maybe you can
by providing your own in the expected package, like overriding
validation messages...).
Anyway that seems to be a legitimate issue and depending on
feedback you
should consider adding a JIRA (or 3). In theory the problem could be
solved by adding/seting a header in the T5 AJAX responses, stating
if it
is raw markup or not. tapestry.js would check for this header and then
behave accordingly (that is, no eval just a content update).
Actually I
think the 'correct' way to do this would be to set a Content-Type of
'application/json' for json reponses
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4627.txt), or 'text/xml' for raw content.
AJAX support has come a long way but it's still notably rough in some
areas (and if you watch the dev or JIRA you've noticed that).
Anyway the
fix I suggested shouldn't take too much work, and I could probably
submit a patch if you can hack together a simple project that
demonstrates the issue. I am quite interested in T5's AJAX support and
really think that it could very much shield developers from dealing
with
a lot of things, it should needs a bit more time in the oven.
chris
Steven Woolley wrote:
Like pouring ajax in my wounds?
Trying to upgrade from 5.0.6, and upgrading all my ajax stuff is
killing me...
The issues I've run into (I'm shoehorning things a bit, by just
returning a block from an actionevent handler and grabbing the markup
from the jsonresponse with my AJAX response handler... in part
because
of a) below) are:
a) Nested zones? I haven't been able to get them working... I have a
page where sometimes I just want to update a few minor elements,
sometimes a big grandfather element...
b) The id namespace issue, broke all my javascript $('divid')
calls...
there are workarounds (one just posted today,much cleaner than
mine...
thanks!) but I'd love to be able to turn this off, for some cases
where duplicate id's won't matter (or is preferred).
c) JSON is powerful, but returning a big complicated element in a
json
string is hurting performance (the escaping I assume server side, and
the eval() clientside, as well as inflating the response size with
all
the escaping...) ... in some cases almost doubling the roundtrip time
over my 5.0.6 solution (2 seconds vs. 4 seconds in Safari 3) and the
difference is more severe in Firefox 3 (and potentially worse in
IE?).. I'd really love to be able to just return the raw markup
again... instead of having to wrap it in a JSON object... if someone
knows how to do this beyond 5.0.6 PLEASE share!!!! Or if someone can
point me to something I can decorate to skip the jsonobject creation,
You'll be my hero!
I should have put c) first... since that's the one I'm struggling
most with...
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://thegodcode.net
----------------------------------------------------
