Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On 7/11/2014 12:43 AM, Sven Meier wrote: Hi Garret, >going forward to tweak Wicket so that it doesn't change our HTML too much we're working on it, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4904 >it doesn't require us to "undo" the HTML that it forces on us I fully agree. I'd be in

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On 7/12/2014 11:00 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Garret Wilson wrote: Martin, I note that getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink(...) et. al. are no longer available in Wicket 7.x. Does that mean that the HTML modification I complained about for disable

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On 7/12/2014 11:10 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/disabled-elements.html 4.14.2 Pseudo-classes :enabled My understanding from reading the above link is that this is a pseudo-class to be used in CSS selectors---that is, to _select_ elements that are enabled. This thread

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:31 AM, Garret Wilson wrote: > Everyone, > > Wicket was created in a world in which little was done at display time to > manipulate the HTML DOM tree, so Wicket felt like it had free reign to muck > around with the HTML given by the developer. But in today's world in whic

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/disabled-elements.html 4.14.2 Pseudo-classes :enabled The :enabled pseudo-class must match any element falling into one of the following categories: - a

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Garret Wilson wrote: > On 7/11/2014 2:25 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: > >> ... >> >> I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. >> It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. >> The benefit is that some of these things are improved the

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Garret Wilson wrote: > On 7/11/2014 2:25 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: > >> ... >> >> I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. >> It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. >> > > That sounds great! I'm going to update my client's p

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

I did a little searching, and it appears that the reference below does _not_ include anchor tags. However, HTML5 allows for a "placeholder hyperlink" by removal of the href attribute. That may be what we're looking for, and it appears (on cursory examin

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On 7/11/2014 2:25 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: ... I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. The benefit is that some of these things are improved there (e.g. p.1) and it is possible to make more radical changes. Changing t

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Simplest way to get started is to create a Github account, which is where wicket is hosted, setup the github app on your PC if using windows. Then just fork wicket to your personal github account. After that just use the app to download to your PC make changes push the changes back to your fork,

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On 7/11/2014 2:25 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: ... I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. That sounds great! I'm going to update my client's project to the 7.0 release stream and go from there. I've already signed up

Re: EXTERNAL: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

> > -Original Message- > From: Garret Wilson [mailto:gar...@globalmentor.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:31 PM > To: dev@wicket.apache.org > Subject: EXTERNAL: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML > > Everyone, > > Wicket was created in a worl

RE: EXTERNAL: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Original Message- From: Garret Wilson [mailto:gar...@globalmentor.com] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:31 PM To: dev@wicket.apache.org Subject: EXTERNAL: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML Everyone, Wicket was created in a world in which little was done at display time t

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Does that include anchor tags? On Jul 11, 2014 8:11 AM, "Martijn Dashorst" wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Nick Pratt wrote: > > Just curious - with regards to disabled links, what HTML is being > suggested > > (or is the 2014 expected norm) as the replacement for the em/span in the >

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Nick Pratt wrote: > Just curious - with regards to disabled links, what HTML is being suggested > (or is the 2014 expected norm) as the replacement for the em/span in the > disabled state? http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/disabled-elements.html Martijn

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Just curious - with regards to disabled links, what HTML is being suggested (or is the 2014 expected norm) as the replacement for the em/span in the disabled state? N On Jul 11, 2014 7:47 AM, "John Sarman" wrote: > Garrett, I also apologize for seeming to strong in my attempt to motivate > you t

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Garrett, I also apologize for seeming to strong in my attempt to motivate you to produce a patch. I do know from experience that patches (pull requests) are the best motivators to the committers. So my counter rant was purely motivational (at least an attempt :) to enhance the codebase. John On

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Martijn Dashorst < martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Martin Grigorov > wrote: > > I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. > > It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. > > The benefit is tha

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote: > I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. > It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. > The benefit is that some of these things are improved there (e.g. p.1) and > it is possible to make more radical chan

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Hi, I recommend you to use Wicket 7.0.0-M2 for new development. It is quite stable! I use it for a personal applications. The benefit is that some of these things are improved there (e.g. p.1) and it is possible to make more radical changes. Changing the default behavior for p.2 will make Wicket's

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Garret Wilson wrote: > John, I sincerely apologize if this came across as a rant. I fully intend to > start contributing to Wicket!! Since I'm new to this group, my intention was > to explain a little about some of the architectural philosophy I will take > in my c

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

In my opinion these criticisms provide a way for us to discuss expected behaviour. I find it good to at least see where our "conventional wisdom" has grown old and should evolve. I'd like Garret to be able to freely provide his insights to where Wicket has different behaviour than a new comer expec

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Hi Garret, >going forward to tweak Wicket so that it doesn't change our HTML too much we're working on it, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-4904 >it doesn't require us to "undo" the HTML that it forces on us I fully agree. I'd be in favour to change CheckBoxMultipleChoice to ha

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

John, I sincerely apologize if this came across as a rant. I fully intend to start contributing to Wicket!! Since I'm new to this group, my intention was to explain a little about some of the architectural philosophy I will take in my contributions. I also wanted to engender some discussion of

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Almost no Wicket component actually generate/modify the HTML structure. You just cited 2 of the very few cases (the only others I can think of are part of the 'extensions' module, which you don't need to use if you don't want to). Just try to do the same with RichFaces :) It can't be expected that

Re: the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Garrett, Since Wicket is open source, why not create the desired patch and submit it to the committers instead of ranting about what caveats (in your opinion) exist. Productivity comes from contributions to code, not from complaining why it does not do it the way you think it should. Once you req

the dangers of Wicket's modifying given HTML

Everyone, Wicket was created in a world in which little was done at display time to manipulate the HTML DOM tree, so Wicket felt like it had free reign to muck around with the HTML given by the developer. But in today's world in which we use JavaScript libraries like jQuery to modify the DOM