Ah, that's true, wicket takes care of resolving the URL and including the content.
I see your point. My concern was for containers that don't explode the WAR when deployed, but I think yours should work for that too, and it avoids the subclass. Thanks! Jason Mihalick wrote: > > Thanks, yes, my solution was close to this, but I opted instead to > subclass the Include class. I think the solution that you propose below > may cause wicket to create an absolute URL to the HTML files under the > WEB-INF dir which will be inaccessible by the browser. /quote> > > No. The URL is never sent to the browser. In fact, logically your code is > exactly the same as mine. > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Using-Include-and-placing-pages-under-WEB-INF-tf4403861.html#a12576277 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
