Then the wording is wrong... in fact it is a reloading list. And as such documented in numerous examples, presentations, books etc. I'm strongly against modifying this behavior, as it would cause a world of hurt for all applications out there where lists suddenly fail to update. Martijn
On 1/17/08, Jan Kriesten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hi martin, > > > The list is not read only, it is reloading. That is the difference! > > erm, in the quote from the 'warning' it reads: > > "... and as people usually use ListViews for displaying read-only lists > (at > least, that's what we think), this is good default behavior." > > so, read-only, not reloading! and read-only lists don't need reloading, > imho. > > > I see that as a confirmation that 99% of our users *don't* have > > problems with the listview the way it is currently setup. > > i would say for the other users it would make no difference if the > ListView > would reuse items, since (see above) 'usually ListViews are used for > displaying > read-only lists'. > > the current default behavior just saves you one 'listview.removeAll()' to > get a > fresh view on the list if the list should have happened to be modified. > > regards, --- jan. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0
