Thanks for the replies. CPM has been working fine for me. Although what Martin says is true, I've been reducing that in my CPM's by means of public static final variables on the bean's classes. Just fields with the name of fields (sort of class meta-info). Then using those fields as wicket:id's...
However, the topic of the post is a real limitation about CPM's and I'll be using PropertyModels instead, although the new solution looks great ;) 2009/12/15 Martin Makundi <[email protected]> > > so you where talking about property models in general (not the compound) > > > > We have a solution for that now > > No. Property models can use constants or "the new solution". But there > is no solution for compound property models, yet. Unless someone knows > how to make the compiler chew html wicket:id's too, which would be > nice. > > my 2cents > > ** > Martin > > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:25, Martin Makundi < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Yes, but it ties your beans to wicket ids. More refactoring and > >> maintenance work. > >> > >> Anyways, if it works for you, use it. > >> > >> my 2cents > >> > >> ** > >> Martin > >> > >> 2009/12/15 Johan Compagner <[email protected]>: > >> > why not > >> > it kills a lot of code. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 17:45, Martin Makundi < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> I wouldn't use CPM for anything serious anyways... > >> >> > >> >> my 2cents > >> >> > >> >> ** > >> >> Martin > >> >> > >> >> 2009/12/14 Xavier López <[email protected]>: > >> >> > Hi, > >> >> > > >> >> > In my application I have a number of fields that allow validation, > by > >> >> means > >> >> > of a validation CheckBox. In order to provide some flexibility for > >> this > >> >> kind > >> >> > of validation fields, I'd like to have them implemented in a > Component > >> >> (i.e. > >> >> > ValidationTickPanel), so that they provide their own markup and > other > >> >> panels > >> >> > using it should not know about its contents. ValidationTickPanel > >> extends > >> >> > Panel in order to be able to provide own markup. > >> >> > > >> >> > The problem is, I'd like to have the CheckBox's wicket:id set from > the > >> >> > parent panel (in order to use CompoundPropertyModel). But I'm > afraid > >> that > >> >> > it's impossible to have a variable wicket_id inside > >> >> > ValidationTickPanel.html... > >> >> > > >> >> > public class ValidationTick extends Panel implements > >> RestrictedComponent > >> >> { > >> >> > public ValidationTick(String componentId, String checkId, IModel > >> >> > checkModel){ > >> >> > super(componentId); > >> >> > CheckBox check = new CheckBox(checkId, checkModel); > >> >> > Label label = new Label(checkId+"Label", new > >> >> > StringResourceModel("")); > >> >> > add(check); > >> >> > add(label); > >> >> > } > >> >> > } > >> >> > > >> >> > <wicket:panel> > >> >> > <input type="checkbox" wicket:id="???"></input> > >> >> > <span wicket:id="???Label"></span> > >> >> > </wicket:panel> > >> >> > > >> >> > Usually, checkModel would be null as the goal would be to use > >> >> > compoundPropertyModel on the checkBox..My question is, is it > possible > >> to > >> >> > achieve this ? Or should I be discarding the CPM idea and passing > for > >> >> > instance a PropertyModel to ValidationTickPanel ? > >> >> > > >> >> > Thanks a lot, > >> >> > Xavier > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> 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] > > -- "Klein bottle for rent--inquire within."
