On Nov 15, 2007 12:27 PM, Gwyn Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that I'd have to say that the main cons are:- > > (a) It does demand a certain level of OO coding, in terms of being > happy to override classes & typically to be able to create anonymous > classes - not a huge amount, but coders grounded in procedural code > will feel lost.
I'm in the camp who doesn't think that is an example. In fact, the big pro of this is that you'll have your developers practice more with OO so Wicket might even make them better coders. It seems to be very specific for the Java (and possibly .NET) crowd as well. I don't think ErlyWeb to name one gets criticized for requiring it's users to know Erlang. > (b) The documention is scattered - partly because there are so many > ways that it can go beyond the basic web-page (i.e. page inheritance, > panels/fragments, embeded forms, built-in AJAX, security, etc,) that > not much short of an encylopedia could do it justice! Documentation will always be something that can be improved. What's new? Even with projects like Hibernate it is sometimes hard to find exactly what you want, and about 90% of open source projects hardly have any documentation. Anyway, it would be great to have a single tutorial that stands out from the rest of the web site to get people going. Someone just has to pick this up again and feel responsible for it. Also, the fact that Martijn and I are writing Wicket In Action is to provide more documentation. So we are working on improving it. Eelco --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
