Hi Garret,
>Wicket should produce plain HTML out of the box
Agreed.
>...but provide the tools so that developers can easily customize the
output
From my experience it is very hard to find solutions that match the
expectations of all users and developers: Wicket enables applications to
build their own solution, but it doesn't have to contain every
imaginable convenience class.
We provide DisabledLinkBehavior for applications which depend exactly on
the old tag-mangling before WIcket 7.x. We all agreed, that nowadays
disabled links represented via other means.
If the class is declared as deprecated, developers have time to think of
their own solution until Wicket 8.x comes out.
Best regards
Sven
On 07/18/2014 06:43 PM, Garret Wilson wrote:
On 7/18/2014 3:05 AM, Sven Meier wrote:
Hi,
3.5) Improve the javadoc and deprecate the class too, so users know
they should move away from it.
Why should users move away from it if they like that behavior? If this
class were generalized, it would be useful to say "have this component
wrap itself is <foo> and </foo> when it is disabled". Wicket shouldn't
force specialized HTML on users, but shouldn't discourage them from
it, either.
My philosophy is: Wicket should produce plain HTML out of the box, but
provide the tools so that developers can easily customize the output
via declarative behaviors, resorting to subclassing components only as
a last resort.
Just my opinion---as you can see I have lots of them. :) I hope you
find some of them helpful.
Cheers,
Garret
