> And regarding the excellent wiki page: that's one thing I don't like > about wicket. Documentation is > not were in belongs, in the code or at least checked in with the code. > I always have to figure > it out by myself if some wiki page is up-to-date or not. > I really never had such a hard time understanding a framework! (but to > repeat myself, I'm not used > to think in components when it comes to web design, so that's probably > just me)
> Take for example Spring or Hibernate: the latest reference always > comes with the distribution and > the code is documented very well. (and maybe better aligns to my > thinking) IMHO the wicket code is documented very well.. but you have to get the basic concept. In this point wicket does not differ from spring or hibernate. Sure, the wiki documentation could be better, but the best way to learn wicket is from examples (quickstart is your friend) and books. But one thing is important: as a web developer you have to leave anything behind. Don't try to do things like you did it before with any other framework. Don't care about how wicket manages request/response ... you only have to know which methods are called during requests. Use models (if you don't know why, don't care .. it takes some time to get this). mm:) If you don't know, which book: http://www.manning.com/dashorst/
