In lots of books about wicket I can see a Page implementation declaring a
Form as an inner class of the Page.
Of course that this is, in part, a personal preference.
I think, in my opinion, that the approach of declaring the Form as an inner
class makes the code more dirty. I mean, the Page class
Daniel Ferreira Castro wrote:
In lots of books about wicket I can see a Page implementation declaring a
Form as an inner class of the Page.
Of course that this is, in part, a personal preference.
I think, in my opinion, that the approach of declaring the Form as an inner
class makes the code
I prefer to declare the Form as a top class instead inner class.
That is ok. This way you can also re-use the same form from different
pages/panels.
If I declare a Form as a top class should I have a markup html for it
because this form will be treated as a component?
Depends on your
If I declare a Form as a top class should I have a markup html for it
because this form will be treated as a component?
Wicket works both ways.
No, Form doesn't extend WebMarkupContainerWithAssociatedMarkup.
Ah.. might be true, if you want it to have its own markup, you will
embed it into
