Re: About AbstractLink
Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Sinyal Kuat INDOSAT -Original Message- From: Heitor Machado Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:08:25 To: Reply-To: users@wicket.apache.org Subject: Re: About AbstractLink Very nice, tanks Jeremy, but the main question is not about SPANs X DIVs, or whatever. And even with this nice snipet, should all disabled links in my app appear with DIVs ? Without exceptions ? tanks Heitor
Re: About AbstractLink
no, they will replace the span. and iirc was changed to a
while back as the default
-igor
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
>
>> afaik anchors in html do not support a disabled attribute. so the only
>> way to make it really unclickable is to not render it as an anchor.
>>
>> of course you can change that by tweaking Jeremy's example
>>
>>
>> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink("");
>>
>> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultAfterDisabledLink("");
>>
>
> Am I wrong or these methods replace the default with / and the
> Heitor talks about is still inside them ?
>
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Heitor Machado
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I noticed some days ago that the AbstractLink component when disabled,
>> > render itself as a span.
>> > Is there some especific motivation for that ?
>> >
>> > I´m asking because I think that a component/element does not have to
>> change
>> > itself in that way, its suposed to be a responsability of its holder, and
>> > any way, why a span ? All applications should render a span instead of an
>> > anchor when that anchor was disabled? Could I perhaps change it´s css
>> class
>> > and strip its actions ? Or nor even render it ?
>> >
>> > Of course we can override the disableLink of AbstractLink (this is the
>> > method that does the magic), but it becomes a problem because now we
>> *have*
>> > to do it.
>> > One of the characteristics that I like most in wicket is freedom, I can
>> use
>> > whatever css and javascript the way I want, I can model my application in
>> > any way I like it, and this is a point of advantage of wicket over other
>> > frameworks, wicket is not pervasive, and the way that method is wrote is
>> > very pervasive.
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> > Heitor
>> >
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: About AbstractLink
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> afaik anchors in html do not support a disabled attribute. so the only
> way to make it really unclickable is to not render it as an anchor.
>
> of course you can change that by tweaking Jeremy's example
>
>
> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink("");
>
> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultAfterDisabledLink("");
>
Am I wrong or these methods replace the default with / and the
Heitor talks about is still inside them ?
>
> -igor
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Heitor Machado
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I noticed some days ago that the AbstractLink component when disabled,
> > render itself as a span.
> > Is there some especific motivation for that ?
> >
> > I´m asking because I think that a component/element does not have to
> change
> > itself in that way, its suposed to be a responsability of its holder, and
> > any way, why a span ? All applications should render a span instead of an
> > anchor when that anchor was disabled? Could I perhaps change it´s css
> class
> > and strip its actions ? Or nor even render it ?
> >
> > Of course we can override the disableLink of AbstractLink (this is the
> > method that does the magic), but it becomes a problem because now we
> *have*
> > to do it.
> > One of the characteristics that I like most in wicket is freedom, I can
> use
> > whatever css and javascript the way I want, I can model my application in
> > any way I like it, and this is a point of advantage of wicket over other
> > frameworks, wicket is not pervasive, and the way that method is wrote is
> > very pervasive.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Heitor
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: About AbstractLink
afaik anchors in html do not support a disabled attribute. so the only
way to make it really unclickable is to not render it as an anchor.
of course you can change that by tweaking Jeremy's example
WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink("");
WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultAfterDisabledLink("");
-igor
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Heitor Machado wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed some days ago that the AbstractLink component when disabled,
> render itself as a span.
> Is there some especific motivation for that ?
>
> I´m asking because I think that a component/element does not have to change
> itself in that way, its suposed to be a responsability of its holder, and
> any way, why a span ? All applications should render a span instead of an
> anchor when that anchor was disabled? Could I perhaps change it´s css class
> and strip its actions ? Or nor even render it ?
>
> Of course we can override the disableLink of AbstractLink (this is the
> method that does the magic), but it becomes a problem because now we *have*
> to do it.
> One of the characteristics that I like most in wicket is freedom, I can use
> whatever css and javascript the way I want, I can model my application in
> any way I like it, and this is a point of advantage of wicket over other
> frameworks, wicket is not pervasive, and the way that method is wrote is
> very pervasive.
>
> Cheers
> Heitor
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
Re: About AbstractLink
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Heitor Machado wrote: > Very nice, tanks Jeremy, but the main question is not about SPANs X DIVs, > or > whatever. And even with this nice snipet, should all disabled links in my > app appear with DIVs ? Without exceptions ? > > A link doesn't have corresponding markup (as a separate markup file). So, it has to be set programmatically. So, you can set a default (like I showed before), and individual links can have AbstractLink#setAfterDisabledLink called. (and setBefore) -- Jeremy Thomerson http://wickettraining.com *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: About AbstractLink
Very nice, tanks Jeremy, but the main question is not about SPANs X DIVs, or whatever. And even with this nice snipet, should all disabled links in my app appear with DIVs ? Without exceptions ? tanks Heitor
Re: About AbstractLink
WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink("");
WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultAfterDisabledLink("");
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Heitor Machado wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed some days ago that the AbstractLink component when disabled,
> render itself as a span.
> Is there some especific motivation for that ?
>
> I´m asking because I think that a component/element does not have to change
> itself in that way, its suposed to be a responsability of its holder, and
> any way, why a span ? All applications should render a span instead of an
> anchor when that anchor was disabled? Could I perhaps change it´s css class
> and strip its actions ? Or nor even render it ?
>
> Of course we can override the disableLink of AbstractLink (this is the
> method that does the magic), but it becomes a problem because now we *have*
> to do it.
> One of the characteristics that I like most in wicket is freedom, I can use
> whatever css and javascript the way I want, I can model my application in
> any way I like it, and this is a point of advantage of wicket over other
> frameworks, wicket is not pervasive, and the way that method is wrote is
> very pervasive.
>
> Cheers
> Heitor
>
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
*Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
