On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Igor Vaynberg <igor.vaynb...@gmail.com>wrote:

> afaik anchors in html do not support a disabled attribute. so the only
> way to make it really unclickable is to not render it as an anchor.
>
> of course you can change that by tweaking Jeremy's example
>
>
> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultBeforeDisabledLink("<a>");
>
> WebApplication.get().getMarkupSettings().setDefaultAfterDisabledLink("</a>");
>

Am I wrong or these methods replace the default <em> with <div>/<a> and the
<span> Heitor talks about is still inside them ?

>
> -igor
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Heitor Machado <heito...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I noticed some days ago that the AbstractLink component when disabled,
> > render itself as a span.
> > Is there some especific motivation for that ?
> >
> > I´m asking because I think that a component/element does not have to
> change
> > itself in that way, its suposed to be a responsability of its holder, and
> > any way, why a span ? All applications should render a span instead of an
> > anchor when that anchor was disabled? Could I perhaps change it´s css
> class
> > and strip its actions ? Or nor even render it ?
> >
> > Of course we can override the disableLink of AbstractLink (this is the
> > method that does the magic), but it becomes a problem because now we
> *have*
> > to do it.
> > One of the characteristics that I like most in wicket is freedom, I can
> use
> > whatever css and javascript the way I want, I can model my application in
> > any way I like it, and this is a point of advantage of wicket over other
> > frameworks, wicket is not pervasive, and the way that method is wrote is
> > very pervasive.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Heitor
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to