really? i guess it is but then you have to copy paste: WebRequestCodingStrategy completely hmm i see that will be pretty hard because there are hard references through out the code to the constants in that class
johan On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Juergen Donnerstag < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > changing the prefix is possible already. There are some test cases > which do that. The only thing that needs to be done is "consistency" > since there are some components/behaviors/whatever which use hardcoded > "wicket". > > Juergen > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Configuring the prefix wicket is something on my todo for 1.5 > > > > > > On 4/12/08, Korbinian Bachl - privat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for clear answer; In case i I add a feature request: would it > > > even be possible to change the Id at a later time? > > > > > > I catch me regularly to add Components like Links, Panels etc. to a > > > List<Component> and have them rendered later on to different Markups > in > > > different ListViews - and that means I need to hold them in sync > > > regarding their id; > > > > > > And another feature request idea: would it be OK to add a synonym for > > > wicket:id="" e.g.: w:id="" or even only :id="" ? Would be some less > > > typing :) > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Korbinian > > > > > > > > > > > > Matej Knopp schrieb: > > > >> short question: Why isn't it possible to have a setId(String id) > on the > > > components? > > > > short anwer: > > > >> - Is it really necessary that they know their id at > creation-time? > > > > yes > > > > > > > > -Matej > > > >> Regards, > > > >> > > > >> Korbinian > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
