this is how enabled works: the actual outcome of whether something will end up being enabled or not is the combination of isEnabled()&&isEnabledAllowed()
for visibility it is currently: isVisible()&&isRenderAllowed() which makes little sense to me because i have to deal with two concepts: visibility and rendering. from my point of view as a user i dont care to know about rendering, i just want to plop my components down and tweak their visibility. when we first introduced this i argued to make isenabled() and isvisible() include the is*allowed() checks, but i didnt win that one back then...but thats another thread. -igor On 11/2/07, Sebastiaan van Erk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Johan Compagner wrote: > >> true that "if something is not rendered then it is not visible". The > >> problem is that the you're confusing the name of the "visible" property > >> with what it means, namely: > >> > >> isVisible() means "is visible IF the component is allowed to render" > > > > > > But the problem is that that line above is not true... > > isVisible() only checks the visible property, it doesn't check if it is also > > allowed to render. > > That's what I'm saying! I'm saying "isVisible()" does not really mean > what the word "visible" means! That is, "visible" means I can see it > (in ordinary English), but isVisible() means something else, namely what > I wrote above (precisely BECAUSE it does not check isRenderAllowed())! > > In wicket if something isVisible() then it will be rendered, but if > something is not rendered, you CANNOT conclude that isVisible(). > Therefore, there ARE 2 different concepts! > > But that's pretty much what you're saying in the rest of the mail, so I > think we're agreeing... :-) > > Regards, > Sebastiaan > > > we have such a method that does both thats isVisibleInHierarchy() > > that checks everything. isVisible()/isRenderedAllowed() and all the parents > > if they are both that. > > > > what is true in wicket is that: > > Component not rendered then isVisible() or isRenderedAllowed() returned > > false; > > > > (ofcourse you have 1 exception to this rule and the component doesn't has > > markup at all, but thats another beast) > > > > johan > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
