ICEfaces
  1. ICEfaces
  2. ICE-2953

Using multiple trees on same form root nodes +/- link use same id

          Details

          • Type: Bug Bug
          • Status: Closed
          • Priority: Major Major
          • Resolution: Fixed
          • Affects Version/s: 1.6.2, 1.7RC1
          • Fix Version/s: 1.7.1
          • Component/s: ICE-Components
          • Labels:
            None
          • Environment:
            All
          • Workaround Exists:
            Yes
          • Workaround Description:
            User seperate forms or include child nodes on all trees

            Description

            When using two trees on the same form the root nodes use the same ID derived from the form id. They are being set as formID:root. These should use the form id and then the tree components id so it would be formID:treeID:root. This causes problems when one tree has no child nodes. For example, we have two trees, TreeA and TreeB. TreeA has child nodes and TreeB does not. When clicking on the +/- link on TreeB it changes the +/- icon on TreeA, but does not actually expand/contract the tree. After clicking on the link for TreeB, it leaves the link for TreeA unusable. If TreeB has child nodes as well as TreeA then everything works fine with no issues. Also if the trees are places in separate forms then there is also no issue. Phillip as noted that a fix could be implemented on the getPathAsString method of TreeRenderer.

              Activity

              Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
              Hide
              Permalink
              yip.ng added a comment -

              Adding the tree id to the node id didn't help. Clicking on one tree still affects the other tree. The problem lies in something else?

              Show
              yip.ng added a comment - Adding the tree id to the node id didn't help. Clicking on one tree still affects the other tree. The problem lies in something else?
              Hide
              Permalink
              yip.ng added a comment -

              I was using the same tree data model for both trees, so the synchronization of the node collapse/expansion was expected behavior. The original reported problem (occurring when using different tree data models for the two trees) did get fixed by changing the node id's.

              Show
              yip.ng added a comment - I was using the same tree data model for both trees, so the synchronization of the node collapse/expansion was expected behavior. The original reported problem (occurring when using different tree data models for the two trees) did get fixed by changing the node id's.

                People

                • Assignee:
                  Unassigned
                  Reporter:
                  Arran McCullough
                • Votes:
                  0 Vote for this issue
                  Watchers:
                  0 Start watching this issue

                  Dates

                  • Created:
                    Updated:
                    Resolved: