Keep in mind I do use WiQuery myself primarily for the Resource Manager, my
main point was that this is the main reason to use WiQuery, like you
mentioned, and that it should only be viewed as an interface was in my
opinion more of a compliment to well written code. And of course people who
don't know jquery or javascript will gain a lot from WiQuery bypassing much
of that knowledge.

I do admit that there are regular updates to WiQuery, but there was some
time where it did not convert its source jquery files to the newer versions
of JQuery (which I understand requires testing etc... and cannot be done
quickly), which I think now can be overriden more easily by the user.

My other main fear is that with a couple of JQuery Wicket modules, which
will stay and be adopted and which will go. I personally hope that WiQuery
will continue to be updated and grow, but with only a couple of people as
maintainers, I thought it could become extinct all of a sudden at any time.
Though it is good to know that it is being used by an organization, which
means there is monetary incentive for them to keep it afloat.

But yes, I do think that WiQuery is a great project! Though I do need to one
day solve issue 77, I am hoping with the new versions of wicket/wiquery it
will have been  somehow solved though I may have solved it by working around
the problem which is probably better code.

Hielke Hoeve-2 wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: msj121 [] 
>>Sent: donderdag 7 april 2011 2:13
>>Subject: Re: Wiquery experiences
>>I both agree and disagree with the aforementioned comments.
>>I don't think anyone would disagree that writing JavaScript from wicket
> or using a decorator to write JavaScript is wrong. In fact quite often I
> may not know the id of an object until run-time and I may want the
> javascript to run on a specific textfield with no extra class names or
> additional tags marking it. To say that you need an extra .js file for a
> one-line or even 20 line simple js command is arguable I think.
> Hence we created the JsScope.quickScope(). However others, like Maarten,
> do not like this function as it allows people to write js code in a java
> class. There are more than 1 way to use WiQuery and everyone can use
> their favorite one.
>>That being said, if you know JavaScript or jQuery, probably WiQuery is
> not the most necessary, it is really an object oriented interface to
> jQuery, not much more as I recall.
> That and resource manager. That is all it needs to be, because otherwise
> it would be slow, large in jar size and unmaintainable. 
>>The best advantage to WiQuery I find is that JQuery at page ready can
> run numerous sets of commands.... All you need to do with WiQuery is add
> these commands and they are all grouped together and run in a single
> document ready function. Similarly WiQuery will take care of keeping
> track of what object id to run the script against, JavaScript files to
> import etc.... It does simplify things, but do you NEED another library,
> some people want to keep as few dependencies as possible, some don't
> care.
>>Remember the real engine is JQuery, WiQuery is just an interface to
> simplify. But look at writing javascript plainly in Wicket. If it is
> easy for you, probably don't bother, but if your getting a headache you
> might want to use WiQuery.
> Hooray for freedom of choice! :-)
>>My main fear is how often it may be updated and how long will it be
> around.
>>I have WiQuery in a current project I may take it out, I notice I
> mostly have been writing my own jQuery anyway.
> Since January we have released 4 new 1.2 versions in which we fixed a
> great deal of bugs and added new features, like the YUI compressor to
> compress resources when in production mode. We have started to work on a
> wicket 1.5 version and are nearing RC status.
> Hielke
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View this message in context:
Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

Reply via email to