Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Hi, Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: I agree 100% - that's the only clean solution I see. To let you all know - Igor has provided a quick solution and committed it to a trunk. Now there is overridible Component#renderPlaceholderTag method. Regards, Adam -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21681424.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
RE: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
I'm unclear of what you actually want here... In the thread you state: I know the benefits of wicket:enclosure. What I need, however is a placeholder, which is what wicket:enclosure doesn't provide (instead it removes it's entire body along with self when the specified child is not visible). This makes it impossible to show a component after the page has been rendered without it. Surely if you use the wicket:enclosure around a tr (something I have done in the past) then surely all you need is a little ajax to make the enclosure and its contents visible again? IIRC all you need to do is to add the list item to the target once you've set the visibility. Feel free to berate if I'm on the wrong track. Regards Andrew -Original Message- From: Jeremy Thomerson [mailto:jer...@wickettraining.com] Sent: 26 January 2009 15:27 To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup I agree 100% - that's the only clean solution I see. On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 9:25 AM, the_adam adam.parchimow...@gmail.comwrote: Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: The problem you're facing is clear - and you're right - wicket:enclosure won't work for you. Unfortunately, that closed-tag code for the placeholder is hard-coded in Component. Thanks for understanding :) Also, I've looked already in the Component source and I realise that it can't be done as is, hence the thread. Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: Hmmm Could you instead have a wrapping component inside of your TR and use that for the visibility swap? (...) Or don't use TR - use div's (...) The wrapping component would be a solution, but it's rather an ugly workaround and a code-expensive one (as of trading invocation of chainable method for an additional container AND manual setting of a td colspan property AND explicit visibility linking). I might have opened this thread in a wrong group - I was thinking about a possibility of reimplementing the placeholder generation fragment of Component#render(MarkupStream) method. Right now it is hardcoded into the method and invoked if flag FLAG_PLACEHOLDER has been set to true. It could delegate the generation to a different method which wouldn't be final. I can think of a few solutions, but since we've settled that my problem won't be solved in a clean way with the current state of Wicket I will move this discussion to developers group. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing- invalid-markup-tp21663544p21667320.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org -- Jeremy Thomerson http://www.wickettraining.com .. CarbonNeutral? office Thomson.co.uk for Holidays, Flights, Hotels, customer reviews and over 2000 videos. Find us at www.thomson.co.uk, Sky 637 or on your high street. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE DISCLAIMER This message, together with any attachments, is for the confidential and exclusive use of the intended addresses(s). If you receive it in error, please delete the message and its attachments from your system immediately and notify us by return e-mail. Do not disclose copy, circulate or use any information contained in this e-mail. (1) The content of this e-mail is to be read subject to our terms of business, as applicable. (2) E-mail may be intercepted or affected by viruses and we accept no responsibility for any interception or liability for any form of viruses introduced with this e-mail. (3) The sender shall remain solely accountable for any statements, representations or opinions that are clearly his or her own and not made in the course of employment. (4) For risk, protection and security purposes, we may monitor e-mails and take appropriate action. Registered Office: TUI Travel House, Crawley Business Quarter, Fleming Way, Crawley, West Sussex RH10 9QL TUI Travel PLC, Registered in England and Wales (Number 6072876) TUI Northern Europe Limited, Registered in England and Wales (Number 3490138) TUI UK Limited, Registered in England and Wales (Number 2830117) ; VAT Number: 233 3687 62 Thomsonfly Limited, Registered in England and Wales (Number 444359); VAT Number: 490 2120 79 Telephone: +44 (0)24 7628 2828 | Fax: +44 (0)24 7628 2844 | IT Helpdesk: +44 (0)20 7383 1555 | IT E-mail: postmas...@thomson.co.uk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
RE: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Phooey wrote: I'm unclear of what you actually want here... Actually what I want has been already provided as stated in my previous post :) Phooey wrote: Surely if you use the wicket:enclosure around a tr (something I have done in the past) then surely all you need is a little ajax to make the enclosure and its contents visible again? IIRC all you need to do is to add the list item to the target once you've set the visibility. You cannot show the enclosure when it is hidden - since it's not a DOM element you cannot add it to target. Instead you'd have to use a WebMarkupContainer (but still you'd have to output it's id, so i.e. wicket:container wouldn't be a go). TR would have to be wrapped in TBODY to make visibility swapping possible. But again I wanted a simple solution without an overhead of adding additional components. Of course you could add your own AJAX js calls that would do thing other way then the Wicket way, but Wicket way is - return a chunk of markup and replace a dom element with a given id with this returned chunk - you need a hook to be there before switching visibility on. Also - you cannot just add ListItem to the target - it's a repeater and they don't have the body of their own - instead their children inherit it. addChildren would be helpful here though. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21682504.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Hi, I'm pretty sure what you need is wicket:enclosure [1] instead [1] http://cwiki.apache.org/WICKET/wickets-xhtml-tags.html the_adam wrote: If we have a component with a corresponding markup tag tr and want to hide it and display placeholder tag via Component#setOutputMarkupPlaceholderTag the resulting markup will be: tr style=display: none; id=componentId/ However this is not a valid markup. The proper markup would be: tr style=display: none; id=componentIdtd span=x/tr where x is the number of columns. Obviously wicket won't know how many columns there are so one would have to set that explicitly. Are you planning to anyhow address this issue, i.e. provide a different placeholder method (maybe WebMarkupContainer#setOutputRowPlaceholderTag(boolean, short)) or is the only way of solving this to manually swap component-to-display with custom placeholder component? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Pills wrote: I'm pretty sure what you need is wicket:enclosure [1] instead That would be the case if I've wanted to hide certain rows forever, unless I'm largely mistaken. I want to be able to switch the visibility of certain table rows and since Wicket's AJAX works by replacing given DOM elements with parts of the DOM tree from the response I need a placeholder to be there, which is exactly opposite of what wicket:enclosure tag is for. However maybe there is a away for inserting a node AFTER the given node or as the last element of the parent's node in Wicket without writing my own behaviours? Implementing this would definitely be worth considering. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21664382.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
the_adam wrote: Pills wrote: I'm pretty sure what you need is wicket:enclosure [1] instead That would be the case if I've wanted to hide certain rows forever, unless I'm largely mistaken. I want to be able to switch the visibility of certain table rows and since Wicket's AJAX works by replacing given DOM elements with parts of the DOM tree from the response I need a placeholder to be there, which is exactly opposite of what wicket:enclosure tag is for. That's exactly what wicket:enclosure does; otherwise you'd have to wrap the row in a WebMarkupContainer to keep a reference in the DOM. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Thies Edeling-2 wrote: That's exactly what wicket:enclosure does; otherwise you'd have to wrap the row in a WebMarkupContainer to keep a reference in the DOM. I know the benefits of wicket:enclosure. What I need, however is a placeholder, which is what wicket:enclosure doesn't provide (instead it removes it's entire body along with self when the specified child is not visible). This makes it impossible to show a component after the page has been rendered without it. The whole problem is even explicily stated on the page that Pills linked to: Note: Changing the visibility of a child component in Ajax callback method will not affect the entire enclosure but just the child component itself. This is because only the child component is added to the AjaxRequestTarget. - though as far as I know even this is misleading since you can't show even a child of something that is not visible. Feel free to prove me wrong on this, but to shut down the subject of wicket:enclosure regarding my case, I am rendering more than one row using a repeater (repeater's body is the tr) and I want to be able to AJAXly switch the visibility of some of those on and off. This excludes wicket:enclosure from possible solutions. If the problem I'm facing isn't clearing enough let me know, I will try to rephrase. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21665137.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
The problem you're facing is clear - and you're right - wicket:enclosure won't work for you. Unfortunately, that closed-tag code for the placeholder is hard-coded in Component. Hmmm Could you instead have a wrapping component inside of your TR and use that for the visibility swap? That's the only thing I can think of at this point. Or don't use TR - use div's, etc, which may only work depending on what you're trying to do, and not for grid-style display. Sorry I couldn't be more help here. On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 7:08 AM, the_adam adam.parchimow...@gmail.comwrote: Thies Edeling-2 wrote: That's exactly what wicket:enclosure does; otherwise you'd have to wrap the row in a WebMarkupContainer to keep a reference in the DOM. I know the benefits of wicket:enclosure. What I need, however is a placeholder, which is what wicket:enclosure doesn't provide (instead it removes it's entire body along with self when the specified child is not visible). This makes it impossible to show a component after the page has been rendered without it. The whole problem is even explicily stated on the page that Pills linked to: Note: Changing the visibility of a child component in Ajax callback method will not affect the entire enclosure but just the child component itself. This is because only the child component is added to the AjaxRequestTarget. - though as far as I know even this is misleading since you can't show even a child of something that is not visible. Feel free to prove me wrong on this, but to shut down the subject of wicket:enclosure regarding my case, I am rendering more than one row using a repeater (repeater's body is the tr) and I want to be able to AJAXly switch the visibility of some of those on and off. This excludes wicket:enclosure from possible solutions. If the problem I'm facing isn't clearing enough let me know, I will try to rephrase. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21665137.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org -- Jeremy Thomerson http://www.wickettraining.com
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: The problem you're facing is clear - and you're right - wicket:enclosure won't work for you. Unfortunately, that closed-tag code for the placeholder is hard-coded in Component. Thanks for understanding :) Also, I've looked already in the Component source and I realise that it can't be done as is, hence the thread. Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: Hmmm Could you instead have a wrapping component inside of your TR and use that for the visibility swap? (...) Or don't use TR - use div's (...) The wrapping component would be a solution, but it's rather an ugly workaround and a code-expensive one (as of trading invocation of chainable method for an additional container AND manual setting of a td colspan property AND explicit visibility linking). I might have opened this thread in a wrong group - I was thinking about a possibility of reimplementing the placeholder generation fragment of Component#render(MarkupStream) method. Right now it is hardcoded into the method and invoked if flag FLAG_PLACEHOLDER has been set to true. It could delegate the generation to a different method which wouldn't be final. I can think of a few solutions, but since we've settled that my problem won't be solved in a clean way with the current state of Wicket I will move this discussion to developers group. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21667320.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: Wicket placeholder for tr component causing invalid markup
I agree 100% - that's the only clean solution I see. On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 9:25 AM, the_adam adam.parchimow...@gmail.comwrote: Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: The problem you're facing is clear - and you're right - wicket:enclosure won't work for you. Unfortunately, that closed-tag code for the placeholder is hard-coded in Component. Thanks for understanding :) Also, I've looked already in the Component source and I realise that it can't be done as is, hence the thread. Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: Hmmm Could you instead have a wrapping component inside of your TR and use that for the visibility swap? (...) Or don't use TR - use div's (...) The wrapping component would be a solution, but it's rather an ugly workaround and a code-expensive one (as of trading invocation of chainable method for an additional container AND manual setting of a td colspan property AND explicit visibility linking). I might have opened this thread in a wrong group - I was thinking about a possibility of reimplementing the placeholder generation fragment of Component#render(MarkupStream) method. Right now it is hardcoded into the method and invoked if flag FLAG_PLACEHOLDER has been set to true. It could delegate the generation to a different method which wouldn't be final. I can think of a few solutions, but since we've settled that my problem won't be solved in a clean way with the current state of Wicket I will move this discussion to developers group. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21667320.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org -- Jeremy Thomerson http://www.wickettraining.com
