I agree 100% - that's the only clean solution I see. On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 9:25 AM, the_adam <adam.parchimow...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: > > > > The problem you're facing is clear - and you're right - wicket:enclosure > > won't work for you. Unfortunately, that closed-tag code for the > > placeholder > > is hard-coded in Component. > > > > Thanks for understanding :) Also, I've looked already in the Component > source and I realise that it can't be done as is, hence the thread. > > > Jeremy Thomerson-5 wrote: > > > > Hmmm.... Could you instead have a wrapping component inside of your TR > > and > > use that for the visibility swap? (...) Or don't use TR - use div's > (...) > > > > The wrapping component would be a solution, but it's rather an ugly > workaround and a code-expensive one (as of trading invocation of chainable > method for an additional container AND manual setting of a td colspan > property AND explicit visibility linking). > > I might have opened this thread in a wrong group - I was thinking about a > possibility of reimplementing the placeholder generation fragment of > Component#render(MarkupStream) method. Right now it is hardcoded into the > method and invoked if flag FLAG_PLACEHOLDER has been set to true. It could > delegate the generation to a different method which wouldn't be final. I > can > think of a few solutions, but since we've settled that my problem won't be > solved in a clean way with the current state of Wicket I will move this > discussion to developers group. > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Wicket-placeholder-for-%3Ctr%3E-component-causing-invalid-markup-tp21663544p21667320.html > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > > -- Jeremy Thomerson http://www.wickettraining.com
