Dan
I would love having this "rendered" argument added.
I read the release notes of Woodstock and I even put the <jsfx:scripts>.
My only issue is that DynaFaces is not being consistent. In a matter of
seconds it works great but then sometimes it says it didn't find the
component for the id specified, which is odd since it's just worked a few
seconds ago.
Hope to hear something else like that of refreshing multiple components from
you guys for next releases.
thanks.
On Feb 16, 2008 2:59 PM, Dan Labrecque <Dan.Labrecque_at_sun.com> wrote:
> The textField has a submit feature, which allows multiple component
> values to be submitted during an Ajax transaction. (See the TLD docs at
> http://webdev2.sun.com/woodstock-tlddocs.) However, if you want to refresh
> multiple components, I recommend using JSF Extensions (i.e., DynaFaces).
>
> Note that Woodstock uses JSF Extensions under the covers. In fact, the
> textField submit feature supports the same "execute" argument of
> DynaFaces.fireAjaxTransaction -- a comma separated list of component IDs.
> However, I'm thinking we could add the "rendered" argument as a pass through
> to JSF Extensions. That way, you could use this feature to submit and
> refresh multiple components via one request. Perhaps as a 4.3 feature?
>
> That said, if you are using DynaFaces or Prototype APIs directly, use the
> JSF Extensions <jsfx:scripts> tag to include this resource when the page
> is loaded. And please read the Woodstock release notes on this topic.
>
> Dan
>
>
> Lking wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I just got the WoodStock 4.2 b2 and prior that I was still with the 4.1one.
> I was used to "DynamicFaces.fireAjaxTransaction" but I'm wondering if
> there's a better way to update multiple fields through AJAX. Let's say I
> submit the value of a TextField and I want 3 others one to be updated when
> the process finishes. The only way I got it work 'till now was with
> DynamicFaces.fireAjaxTransaction but I'm eager to know if there's
> something better at 4.2 release as DynaFaces is not working properly.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>