When is the killer case for using id?
Alex Objelean wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is that switching from id to class is not such a good
> idea, simply because the ID attributes guaranties (of course you can
> create two elements with same ID, but it is not the same as with class
> attribute) the unicity of the element, also you can find the element from
> js using document.getElementById...
>
> I hope that this radical change will not be made in the 1.3 release as it
> has a great impact on any application developed using the latest beta3
> release. Also I think this issue should be discussed more between the core
> developers.
>
> Alex.
>
>
> Sam Hough wrote:
>>
>> We are going to stop using ids and move over to class as it make re-use
>> easier and avoids a number of wicket problems with ids... The HTML monkey
>> is not happy though. He reminds me of the Family Guy screaming monkey
>> today.
>>
>>
>>
>> Alex Objelean wrote:
>>>
>>> This is about how wicket generates dynamically markupID.
>>>
>>> I have, for instance, the following markup component:
>>>
>>> <input wicket:id="quantity.noOfUnits" />
>>>
>>> The generated markupId for this component looks like the following:
>>> quantity.noOfUnits1232 .
>>>
>>> I suggest to escape any css valid specifiers from the generated
>>> markupId, by replacing them with something else (for instance '_'
>>> character).
>>>
>>> The problem appear when I am trying to identify the component by it's id
>>> using some js library (like jQuery) and as a consequence the result of
>>> this query: $("#quantity.noOfUnits1232") is invalid.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> Alex.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/-RFE--getMarkupId%28%29-tf4493344.html#a12821479
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
