Hi Sebastien, This is a known problem. I believe there is/was a ticket about it. If my memory serves me well I've closed that ticket as part of all tickets which been fixed with WICKET-3335 (component queueing).
An year or two ago I suggested at dev@ to deprecate <wicket:enclosure> because it is has many problems but the consensus was that it works well for 80% and this is enough to keep it around. I'd suggest to use EnclosureContainer in the other 20% of the cases. Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Sebastien <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks a lot Sven, > > Actually, I've another concern with the link: > > In my use-case, I also have got: > /- wicket:enclosure child=container > /-/- an ajax link (id=minimize) > /-/- the container > > If the container is not visible - setVisible(false) - then I've got an > error in the ajax debug window: > *ERROR: * > Cannot bind a listener for event "click" on element "minimizef5" > because the element is not in the DOM > > Is it the intended behavior? Would you like me to open an issue/quickstart > for that? > > Thanks in advance, > Sebastien. > > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Sven Meier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Sebastien, > > > > seems I removed that method in back-and-forth of WICKET-4904. > > > > I'll restore this functionality asap. > > > > Regards > > Sven > > > > > > > > On 15.01.2015 15:08, Sebastien wrote: > > > >> Hi devs, > >> > >> First of all, I would like to wish you an happy coding year! :) > >> > >> I see there is some changes in AbstractLink between 6 & 7, and I am > >> wondering why #isLinkEnabled has been removed from there. > >> > >> I am in a use case where my container is disabled, but still I would > like > >> my child link is enabled. Even #isLinkEnabled was just an helper to > >> isEnabledInHierarchy, it used to have the advantage to not being final, > so > >> I could override it and this would answer my usecase... > >> > >> Would you agree to restore it? > >> > >> Thanks a lot in advance, > >> Sebastien. > >> > >> > > >
