i dont see why we should support this. if you expect the user to mess with your urls then you should either leave it as a query string or use indexed coding strat. imho we should fail early - imagine looking at logs and trying to figure out wtf that url came from. could it be a wicket encoding problem? user messed with it? etc etc.
the code to support this wouldnt be hairy at all - just remove the check and see if param is missing and add it as ""...hmm or maybe better to add it as null? see what i mean. -igor On 8/6/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/5/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > mount with indexed url coding strategy if you dont mind users messing > > with your urls. > > I think it's kind of annoying as well. Are we (Wicket devs) really > against supporting this, or don't we support it because the code gets > a bit hairy? > > Eelco > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
