Can I use <f:setPropertyActionListener> inside an autoComplete component?
The autoComplete uses the managedbean mbAC for example and I want to send the cliCod from it to another bean with:
<f:setPropertyActionListener target="#{targetBean.cliCod}" value="#{mbAC}" />
Is <f:setPropertyActionListener> the right way to do this?
The <f:setPropertyActionListener> works only inside a component implementing ActionSource interface, such as <h:commandButton>, <h:commandLink>. It's unclear what autocomplete component you're talking about, but the PrimeFaces <p:autoComplete> doesn't implement it.
You need to look for an alternate solution, such as placing the bean in the right scope and/or using #ManagedProperty and/or using <p:ajax> instead. The exact solution depends on the concrete functional requirement which you didn't tell anything about.
In the future questions it would be more helpful for us and yourself if you ask how to achieve the given functional requirement instead of asking how to achieve a solution of which you thought that it's the right solution but which after all isn't.
Related
I have a question about the idea behind the fact, that only UIForm got the attribute prependId. Why is the attribute not specified in the NamingContainer interface? You will now probably say that's because of backward compability but I would preferre breaking the compability and let users which implement that interface, also implement methods for the prependId thing.
The main problem from my perspective about the prependId in the UIForm component is, that it will break findComponent()
I would expect that if I use prependId, then the NamingContainer behaviour would change, not only related to rendering but also when wanting to search for components in the component tree.
Here a simple example:
<h:form id="test" prependId="false">
<h:panelGroup id="group"/>
</h:form>
Now when i want to get the panelGroup component I would expect to pass the string "group" to the method findComponent(), but it won't find anything, I have to use "test:group" instead.
The concrete problem with that is, when using ajax with prependId="false". The ajax tag expects in the attributes update and process, that the values care of naming containers. It's a bit strange that when I use prependId="false" that I have to specify the full id or path, but okay.
<h:form id="test" prependId="false">
<h:panelGroup id="group"/>
</h:form>
<h:form id="test1" prependId="false">
<h:commandButton value="go">
<f:ajax render="test:group"/>
</h:commandButton>
</h:form>
Well this code will render without problems but it won't update the panelGroup because it cannot find it. The PartialViewContext will contain only the id "group" as element of the renderIds. I don't know if this is expected, probably it is but I don't know the code. Now we come to the point where the method findComponent() can not find the component because the expression passed as parameter is "group" where the method would expect "test:group" to find the component.
One solution is to write your own findComponent() which is the way I chose to deal with this problem. In this method i handle a component which is a NamingContainer and has the property prependId set to false like a normal UIComponent. I will have to do that for every UIComponent which offers a prependId attribute and that is bad. Reflection will help to get around the static definition of types but it's still not a really clean solution.
The other way would be introducing the prependId attribute in the NamingContainer interface and change the behaviour of findComponent() to work like described above.
The last proposed solution would be changing the behaviour of the ajax tag to pass the whole id, but this would only solve the ajax issue and not the programmatic issues behind the findComponent() implementation.
What do you think about that and why the hell is it implemented like that? I can't be the first having this problem, but I wasn't able to find related topics?!
Indeed, UIComponent#findComponent() as done by <f:ajax render> fails when using <h:form prependId="false">. This problem is known and is a "Won't fix": JSF spec issue 573.
In my humble opinion, they should never have added the prependId attribute to the UIForm during the JSF 1.2 ages. It was merely done to keep j_security_check users happy who would like to use a JSF form with JSF input components for that (j_security_check requires exact input field names j_username and j_password which couldn't be modified by configuration). But they didn't exactly realize that during JSF 1.2 another improvement was introduced which enables you to just keep using <form> for that instead of sticking to <h:form>. And then CSS/jQuery purists start abusing prependId="false" to avoid escaping the separator character : in their poorly chosen CSS selectors.
Just don't use prependId="false", ever.
For j_security_check, just use <form> or the new Servlet 3.0 HttpServletRequest#login(). See also Performing user authentication in Java EE / JSF using j_security_check.
For CSS selectors, in case you absolutely need an ID selector (and thus not a more reusable class selector), simply wrap the component of interest in a plain HTML <div> or <span>.
See also:
How to select JSF components using jQuery?
How to use JSF generated HTML element ID with colon ":" in CSS selectors?
By default, JSF generates unusable ids, which are incompatible with css part of web standards
I am using PrimeFaces and JSF - I need to be able to set a component on the page as mandatory in response to an AJAX event. Is the best way to accomplish this using the following code or is there also a way to accomplish it using JQuery ?
Thanks
UIInput componentToChange = (UIInput) facesContext.getViewRoot().findComponent("ComponentId");
componentToChange.setRequired(true);
Thanks
Just set the component's required attribute with the desired EL expression.
E.g.
<h:inputText ... required="#{bean.required}" />
There are even EL ways without needing an additional bean property, but it's impossible to propose one based on the sparse information provided so far.
Use findComponent() with care. Think twice if it really can't be done just in the view (XHTML) side.
I have been using primefaces in JSF and trying to set commandLink value through managedbean class.
<p:commandLink value="#{loginBean.userClass}" id="userclass" action="{user.userClassAction}" />
ManagedBean:
public String getUserClass()
{
return "userClass";
}
I am asking that, is this correct way to that process from server side
Any suggestion for this .. Is this format correct , if so how can i use it appropriate way.
What do you want to achieve? The value is the text of the link. It would be "userClass" in this case and I'm not sure this makes sense here.
If you want to change the css class you may do that via the styleClass attribute.
If you really want to have some kind of dynamic text for the link. Then yes, using a managed bean is probably the only (non-hacky) way to do so.
If you only want to care about internationalization, then you better use the standard java-way for that. Using .properties files, referencing them via #{msg['key']} and declaring them for JSF via:
<resource-bundle>
<base-name>your.pkg.MessageBundle</base-name>
<var>msg</var>
</resource-bundle>
Simple question:
Is there any way of rendering a html <button>-element using JSF or any other framework (RichFaces, Tomahawk etc.)? Or would I have resort to writing a custom component for this?
No, there isn't. Since a <button> is usually only used in GET requests, you can also just put it plain vanilla in the JSF template. You don't need to bind any action to a JSF managed bean anyway.
In JSF 2.0, there's by the way the <h:button> which renders a GET button and offers the option to include view parameters and/or to perform implicit navigation. Both features aren't available in JSF 1.2, so there's not really a point of having similar component in JSF 1.2 anyway.
On the other hand, if you actually intend to use a <button> to invoke a POST managed bean action method, then you should really be using a <h:commandButton> instead. If you're having a specific problem with it for which you thought that using <button> was the solution, then you'd need to reframe your question to elaborate in more detail about that specific problem so that we can answer how to achieve the same with <h:commandButton>.
What is or could be a best practice?
Using standard JSF components and combine them by PrimeFaces components when needed (for example when DHTML or AJAX components are needed)
Forget all JSF Components and try to use all PrimeFaces components as much as possible
Please explain it and tell me about your experiences.
Thanks in advance...
PrimeFaces is your AJAX framework, so if you need to send ajaxical request, then use PrimeFaces components.
Even though, you dont need to send ajax request, but you can still use PF component, if u need to provide a consistency look for your web page. For example, h:commandButton and p:commandButton. Use p:commandButton if u need to send ajax request, but u can also do this
<p:commandButton ajax="false" action="Your Action here"/>
This will provide the same result as:
<h:commandButton action="Your Action here"/>
but this way, you can provide the same consistent look for your button throughout the page.
PrimeFaces does not have replacements for h:panelGrid, h:panelGroup, h:inputText, h:outputText ...
Depends on the sole functional requirement. If you're already using PrimeFaces and whatever you want to achieve can better/easier be achieved using a PrimeFaces component, use it.
Option 1 comes close, but option 2 goes overboard. PrimeFaces for example doesn't have a <p:form>, <p:panelGroup>, <p:outputText> or something.
With Primefaces it's very easy to get a consistent look for your application since it comes with Themeroller CSS framework. And you can easily switch designs. Although it is not difficult to let plain jsf components look like primefaces components if you apply the right css classes.
I think primefaces is a great component library. However some components are still buggy (e.g. date picker). So if you get some unexpected behavior with a primefaces component, it is alway good to have a jsf fallback (or an alternative from another component library or from jquery).
I have no experience with mixing different component libraries. Would be interesting to know, how they interact. But that would be subject of another question ...