Hmmm... more tags? I thought you guys liked Wicket because it's plain html support. Now looks like there's a big interest in having more tags. If this is true, why don't we go back a few years, or move to JSF? Let's give Wicket support to Tag Libraries too :)
For the record, I don't like wicket:enclosure, neither wicket:fragment and you guys want to put more? Instead, I prefer new attributes to keep my html plain. <div wicket:fragment="fragment-id"></div> Regards, On Nov 6, 2007 9:35 AM, Chris Colman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I totally agree with you, having named extension points would be > perfect. > > However, I am trying to do a quick proof of concept that can be > discussed > > before I implement all those nice and shiny features. Hopefully this > > prototype convinces some of those sceptics out there ;) > > I think the anyone who understands how Java supports multiple abstract > methods without supporting multiple inheritance should be convinced. If it > makes sense for OO languages to support multiple overriddable abstract > methods why should wicket be limited to only a single overridable markup > section? > > > I already figured out how to implement this change. Basically, it's only > a > > single method (MergedMarkup.merge(...)) to change ... but this method > has > > 275 lines and needs *major* refactoring ... damn. > > Doh! I reckon you'll have more success adding a completely new tag set > because touching the old one get people worried that it might break. If you > have a new tag set you are free to define the syntax and behaviour - and you > have no chance of breaking how the old tag set works. There's nothing wrong > with two tag sets - especially as the new one can be named correctly and > will have to support named extension points, eventually. > > > > > However, changing the name of the tag (while it would make perfect > sense) > > seems to be more complicated. You would have to make sure, that tags are > > not > > mixed up and decide between two different > markup-merging-implementations, > > although one implementation is capable of doing the same as the other > one > > - > > and more. > > Maybe make 'child' an alias for 'abstract' and 'extends' an alias for > 'implements' and then use your funky new markup-merging-implementation to > handle both multiple (if names are provided) and fallback to single (if no > names are provided) - single is then just an ordinary case of multiple where > n=1. > > > > > However, I'll consider using a different name and separate > implementation > > for the prototype. > > > > -- Stefan > > > > > > > > Chris Colman wrote: > > > > > >> if i were you i would use tags other then extend and child just so > you > > >> dont conflict. > > > > > > Yes Stefan, I would think that would be a better approach to use a new > > set > > > of tags. It also allows you to choose more correct naming (because > > > inheritance isn't actually a parent/child relationship so the word > child > > > just confuses the issue). > > > > > > Maybe wicket:abstract in the base and wicket:implements (nice - thanks > > to > > > whoever suggested that) or wicket:override in the derived (extended) > > > markup. > > > > > > I think using IDs up front would also be great, if not necessary, > > because > > > in Java as would probably occur in wicket mark up, you can have > > > intermediate classes that don't implement all abstract methods in a > base > > > class. Without IDs you won't know exactly which abstract method an > > > intermediate class is implementing. > > > > > > This example hopefully demonstrates what I mean: > > > > > > Base > > > ---- > > > <wicket:abstract id=header /> > > > <wicket:abstract id=body /> > > > > > > PumpsBase > > > --------- > > > <wicket:implements id=header> > > > A header for all pages to do with pumps > > > </wicket:implements> > > > > > > Note: no body implemented here - deferred until a more specialized > > > class/markups: WaterPumpsBase and OilPumpsBase > > > > > > WaterPumpBase > > > ------------- > > > Note: no header implemented here - the general PumpsBase one suffices > > for > > > all pumps pages > > > > > > <wicket:implements id=body> > > > A body discussing water pumps > > > </wicket:implements> > > > > > > > > > OilPumpBase > > > ----------- > > > Note: no header implemented here - the general PumpsBase one suffices > > for > > > all pumps pages > > > > > > <wicket:implements id=body> > > > A body discussing oil pumps > > > </wicket:implements> > > > > > > > > > I think the tag pairs abstract/implements flow much better from an OO > > > perspective than child/extends. It hurts my brain way to much to think > > of > > > a base class as a child. > > > > > >> > > >> -igor > > >> > > >> > > >> On 11/5/07, Stefan Fußenegger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > Well, what I'd like to do is what I explained in my first post. One > > >> would > > >> > still have a one-one-relationship if it comes to files (Base.html, > > >> Base.java > > >> > - Sub.html, Sub.java). However, a Base.html might contain more than > > one > > >> > <wicket:extend />. So this no longer an exact duplicate of the > > parent- > > >> child > > >> > relationship that is already specified by the java class hierarchy. > > It > > >> now > > >> > would be similar to abstract method, where the abstract class > > specifies > > >> one > > >> > or more extension points that are implemented by its subcasses ... > > >> abstract > > >> > methods. There isn't a restriction, that there is only one abstract > > >> method > > >> > per class! > > >> > > > >> > My proof of concept would go the probably easiest way and just link > > the > > >> > first extend with the first child, the second extend with the > second > > >> child, > > >> > the third ... you got the idea ;) At a later point it might be > useful > > >> to > > >> > link them using ids (like the names of abstract methods). > > >> > > > >> > You could than for instance do some hierarchies like this: > > >> > > > >> > BaseClass - Application base class. Navigation on top, two columns > > with > > >> > wicket:extend > > >> > SectionOneBaseClass extends BaseClass - Sub-navigation in left > column > > >> > SectionOneIndex extends SectionOneBaseClass - Navigation on top, > > >> > sub-navigation in left column and some fancy content in right > column > > >> > > > >> > I totally agree to anybody who argues that this is already possible > > by > > >> other > > >> > means. However, to me it seems to be the most natural and elegant > way > > >> to > > >> do > > >> > this. > > >> > > > >> > As I mentioned before, I don't know Wicket's inner workings too > much, > > >> so > > >> I > > >> > will definitely need some pointers to the right directions. > > >> > > > >> > My naive guess is that Wicket parses BasePage.html and looks for > > >> > SecionOneBaseClass.html and the first <wicket:child /> as soon as > it > > >> finds a > > >> > <wicket:extend />. The idea would know be to just add a counter to > > this > > >> > call, asking for the second <wicket:child />, rather than the first > > (I > > >> doubt > > >> > that it's really going to be that easy though). > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Bruno Borges wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Stefan, try first giving us an example of what would you like to > > do. > > >> What > > >> > > I > > >> > > can see is that you want this: > > >> > > > > >> > > BasePage.html > > >> > > <html> > > >> > > <body> > > >> > > <h1>BasePage</h1> > > >> > > <hr/> > > >> > > <h3>This is my child:</h3> > > >> > > <wicket:child /> > > >> > > <hr/> > > >> > > <h3>This is my OTHER child:</h3> > > >> > > <wicket:child /> > > >> > > </body> > > >> > > </html> > > >> > > > > >> > > ** Example of a child page:* > > >> > > ChildPage.html > > >> > > <html> > > >> > > <body> > > >> > > <wicket:extend> > > >> > > <h4>ChildPage</h4> > > >> > > <h5>I'm your child</h5> > > >> > > </wicket:extend> > > >> > > </body> > > >> > > </html> > > >> > > > > >> > > Now, given this html, how do you see the Java code structured? > > What's > > >> your > > >> > > vision? > > >> > > > > >> > > On Nov 5, 2007 11:28 AM, Stefan Fußenegger > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Eelco Hillenius wrote: > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> >> It would be quite feasible to add support for multiple > > overridden > > >> > >> >> sections using the above tag names while remaining backwards > > >> > >> compatible > > >> > >> >> with existing markup by continuing to support the old > > >> <child/extends> > > >> > >> >> tags working the way they always have. > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > It's kind of a predictable answer, but the best way to push > new > > >> ideas > > >> > >> > forward is to supply us with a patch, so that we can discuss > > some > > >> > >> > working code. The current committers don't see much in the > idea, > > >> but > > >> > >> > that doesn't mean they wouldn't want to support at least the > > >> option > > >> of > > >> > >> > plugging this in. And hey, maybe some working code convinces > us > > >> :-) > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > Eelco > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> -- > > >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Hi eelco, > > >> > >> > > >> > >> I'd love to do a proof of concept here. Admittedly, I don't know > > >> wicket's > > >> > >> inner workings very well. But if I get some support, I'd try > > >> implementing > > >> > >> this. I am currently looking through the code, but can't find > > where > > >> the > > >> > >> transition between parent and child takes place (in other words: > > the > > >> line > > >> > >> of > > >> > >> code that recognizes the wicket:extend tag and takes the > > appropriate > > >> > >> action). If somebody could point me to that line I would try to > > >> implement > > >> > >> this possible new feature ... well, I'll first estimate the time > > >> > >> necessary > > >> > >> to do so and see if I can afford it ;) > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Regards > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> ----- > > >> > >> ------- > > >> > >> Stefan Fußenegger > > >> > >> http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com // looking for a nicer domain > ;) > > >> > >> -- > > >> > >> View this message in context: > > >> > >> http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-%3Cwicket%3Achild--%3E-tags-on-a- > > >> single-base-page--tf4738673.html#a13586814 > > >> > >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Bruno Borges > > >> > > blog.brunoborges.com.br > > >> > > +55 1185657739 > > >> > > > > >> > > "The glory of great men should always be > > >> > > measured by the means they have used to > > >> > > acquire it." > > >> > > - Francois de La Rochefoucauld > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > ----- > > >> > ------- > > >> > Stefan Fußenegger > > >> > http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com // looking for a nicer domain ;) > > >> > -- > > >> > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multiple- > > >> %3Cwicket%3Achild--%3E-tags-on-a-single-base-page-- > > >> tf4738673.html#a13587701 > > >> > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- > > ------- > > Stefan Fußenegger > > http://talk-on-tech.blogspot.com // looking for a nicer domain ;) > > -- > > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Multiple- > > %3Cwicket%3Achild--%3E-tags-on-a-single-base-page-- > > tf4738673.html#a13597619 > > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Bruno Borges blog.brunoborges.com.br +55 1185657739 "The glory of great men should always be measured by the means they have used to acquire it." - Francois de La Rochefoucauld
