:msj...@gmail.com]
>>Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 2:13
>>To: users@wicket.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Wiquery experiences
>>
>>I both agree and disagree with the aforementioned comments.
>>
>>I don't think anyone would disagree that writing JavaScript
>
>-Original Message-
>From: msj121 [mailto:msj...@gmail.com]
>Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 2:13
>To: users@wicket.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Wiquery experiences
>
>I both agree and disagree with the aforementioned comments.
>
>I don't think anyone wou
>-Original Message-
>From: joseph.pac...@gmail.com [mailto:joseph.pac...@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Live Nono
>Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 13:47
>To: users@wicket.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Wiquery experiences
>- does wiquery support being used from a wicket ajax request nic
Ernesto, Hielke
thanks a lot for your answers
At the time I looked at wiquery, it was for some specific task. This
task didn't include explorating whether a full blown jquery/wicket
integration framework would fit our needs. This is quite a task on its
own imho, and there the lack of documentatio
ted most often something like "document.onready(.);".
>>
>>
>> There are other libraries around that do about the same as WiQuery, and
>> perhaps better or faster, but my rant above is to clarify why the project
>> exists and why people
ot;document.onready(.);".
>>
>>
>> There are other libraries around that do about the same as WiQuery, and
>> perhaps better or faster, but my rant above is to clarify why the project
>> exists and why people are using it. And the best part of it is: you d
WiQuery, and
> perhaps better or faster, but my rant above is to clarify why the project
> exists and why people are using it. And the best part of it is: you don't
> have to use it...
>
> Regards,
>
> Hielke
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruno Borges [mai
On 07 Apr 2011, at 09:54, Hielke Hoeve wrote:
> Maarten says:
> Writing what should be JavaScript in your wicket Java code is quite
> out-of-place, and generally all you need to do is place your code where it
> belongs, in a .js or your markup.
>
> I wonder if he ever really used WiQuer
exists and why people are using it. And the best part of it is: you don't
> have to use it...
>
> Regards,
>
> Hielke
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruno Borges [mailto:bruno.bor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 0:32
> To: users@wicket.apache.org
&g
Bruno Borges [mailto:bruno.bor...@gmail.com]
Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 0:32
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Cc: Maarten Billemont
Subject: Re: Wiquery experiences
Most of the things you want to do with jQuery, you don't need a library for.
I totally agree with Maarten
Bruno Borges
www.brunoborges
ve WiQuery in a current project I may take it out, I notice I mostly
have been writing my own jquery anyway.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Wiquery-experiences-tp3430320p3432209.html
Sent from the Users forum mailing list archiv
Most of the things you want to do with jQuery, you don't need a library for.
I totally agree with Maarten
Bruno Borges
www.brunoborges.com.br
+55 21 76727099
"The glory of great men should always be
measured by the means they have used to
acquire it."
- Francois de La Rochefoucauld
On Wed,
Unless WiQuery has matured a *lot* lately and the code has been cleaned up
significantly, I can't recommend it, personally.
Writing what should be JavaScript in your wicket Java code is quite
out-of-place, and generally all you need to do is place your code where it
belongs, in a .js or your ma
Hi,
We are thinking of using wiquery for a project. We are interested in
the experiences of people using it. Does wiquery work in the major
browsers (IE7, IE8, IE9, FF3 and Chrome)? Are there any complications
when different versions of jquery are used on other places in the
HTML? What is
14 matches
Mail list logo
