I'm actually wondering something here about the way you had Boon Ping
implement the database manager stuff...
It looks like you're actually creating a completely new page
component, derived from WebPage.
What I'm wondering is your strategy for the application
"border" (using wicket lingo). I don't think it would be a great idea
to have to have a separate css, header, footer, bla, bla, for each
page of an application.
In wicket, this is done by having a superclass that contains this
stuff, but you mentioned that you don't like the idea of inheritance.
So, what's your strategy for this? That's not quite clear to me yet...
I was thinking that the application would have one container, derived
from WebPage, that would hold all the border stuff. Within the page,
there would be a content section that could hold one or more
PaxComponent bundles (each perhaps contributing a menu item to the
page container).
Sounds like that would work well with OSGi, but then again, it sounds
like we'd lose the benefits of page mounting and such that wicket
provides.
Anyway, I'll continue working on this today, since I need this now.
Cheers,
Dave
On Dec 19, 2006, at 6:50, David Leangen wrote:
>
>> Yes, the "best practice" I have in mind is that the bundle that
>> contains the
>> PAGE that you want to LINK TO, registers the MenuItem for that
>> Page. And that
>> the bundle that own the Page where the Link will show up,
>> instantiates and
>> manages the Menu. ("Manage" in this context is primarily
>> identification and
>> rendering.)
>>
>> So, I don't think we are on different pages (pun intended) on this
>> one. I
>> perhaps need better explaination in the docs and the example will
>> show what I
>> mean in better detail.
>
>
> Nice pun. He he.
>
> This sounds good.
>
> There's only one thing that I find a bit confusing. IIUC, your
> meaning of "page" differs from the wicket meaning of "page". In
> wicket, IIUC, each new page has it's own strategy for loading a
> "border", which includes the css. In other words, a Page is a special
> kind of Component that provides additional resources beyond what most
> Components provide.
>
> In pax-wicket, a "page" can be any component.
>
> Anyway, this is a bit confusing to mere mortals such as myself. Can
> we think about changing the name from "page" to something else? Like
> maybe PaxComponent or whatever?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general@lists.ops4j.org
> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@lists.ops4j.org
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
