I was not talking about specific cases, like my problem with validation which was admittedly my fault. What I want to say is that its not very friendly to send the URL of a book. It gives the impression that "I dont care". Sometimes, all we need is a holding hand.
Dont want to start a flame war, but the folks over at the Wicket mailing list dont seem to be bothered with answering any and all questions. Granted, there are no books about Wicket, the framework is you and they want to draw developers. But the atmosphere is lighter. At least I feel more comfortable there. Once again, these are my views. Dont take this personally or as an attack on the framework. I love Tapestry and it is working up to what I expected it to be. On 5/11/06, Sam Gendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/10/06, Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, first, you reference it as Kent's book. Most people come to Tapestry > because a project landed on their laps and they need to get up to speed > quickly. Referencing a book as "Kent's" is somewhat vague. > > Second, most of the time we just want quick answers. I know I didnt need the > book, I just needed some help clearing a couple of specific doubts. When > we're looking for a quick answer, referencing the book is the same as saying > "go away". It sends the wrong vibe about the mailing list. I hate to disagree, but when someone is asking about a significant and complex piece of functionality which is amply documented elsewhere, I think it is perfectly legitimate to point them at that documentation, rather than typing all the documentation into an email. I brought up Kent's book (which costs money, admittedly) only because I felt that his coverage of validation was superior to the standard Tap4 docs, and because you'd already gotten a link to the standard docs, so I wanted to make sure you knew about both sources. I also included the full title of the book and mentioned where to find a link to it. I don't really know how I could have been friendlier about suggesting that you read the docs before asking questions that are already easily answered elsewhere. I didn't want to give you a quickie answer for fear that I would either misinform you due to my own inexperience or that I might fail to completely answer your question. Much easier to send you to the source and get it right the first time. --sam > > On 5/10/06, Sam Gendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > More telling, I think, is the fact that the folks who answer questions > > around here often reference it, and many of the folks asking questions > > haven't read it yet. It certainly gave me a baseline of Tapestry > > knowledge very rapidly. I still have a ton to learn, but it got me > > started. > > > > --sam > > > > > > On 5/10/06, Pedro Viegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If anybody has doubts of what Sam is saying about this book... > > > if anyone thinks it's just a book he, me, and a few others liked... > > > Do make a search on this forum for quotes on this book... it's not that > > old > > > and you will see the results! > > > Garanteed! It's a must have. ;-) > > > > > > On 5/10/06, Sam Gendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Again, "Enjoy Web Development with Tapestry" (the pdf book about tap4) > > > > covers validation in detail. I highly recommend it. See the Tap home > > > > page for details. > > > > > > > > --sam > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/9/06, Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > You might not believe me, but I only saw the "validators" attribute > > now. > > > > And > > > > > I've been looking at that page for the past 2 hours. > > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/06, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/tapestry/UsersGuide/validation.html > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/9/06, Rui Pacheco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone, someone... Could you provide me with an example of > > > > validation in > > > > > > > Tapestry 4? Is it possible to do it inline in the html, > > something > > > > like > > > > > > > <input jwcid="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" validation="Email"> ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have been searching on the net, but the examples that I see > > are > > > > only > > > > > > for > > > > > > > Tapestry 3 and the ones for Tapestry 4 don't touch validation at > > > > all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Cumprimentos, > > > > > > > Rui Pacheco > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jesse Kuhnert > > > > > > Tacos/Tapestry, team member/developer > > > > > > > > > > > > Open source based consulting work centered around > > > > > > dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Cumprimentos, > > > > > Rui Pacheco > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Pedro Viegas > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Cumprimentos, > Rui Pacheco > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Cumprimentos, Rui Pacheco
