Igor Vaynberg-2 wrote: > > extending panel A means that your components go into panel A not into > one of its children. >
Yep. That's why I used setTransparentResolver on the sectionBorder in 1.4 to make things work. Igor Vaynberg-2 wrote: > > you can provide a special addChild() method, or provide > addChildren(WebMarkupContainer) callback that you call from A's > onInitialize() or let your panel A implement IComponentResolver and > try to locate children itself (this is not good for code that depends > on the actual hierarchy to function). > > -igor > My scenario is that all panels that extend panel A should get the same appearance, which is provided by the border component in panel A. The idea was that users of Panel B should not have to be aware of any special methods, they should just use "add" to add components as usual. So if I can avoid it I would rather not add any special methods. I guess my solution will be to replace the border in panel A with the actual html of the border. It will work even if I lose the reusability I had with keeping design in the border component. If I understand things correctly, it is not possible to have a <wicket:child/> element which is not a direct child to the base panel, without providing some extra methods (or implement IComponentResolver). I'm not saying this is a bad thing, just trying to understand how things work now. Thank you for your time! On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:15 PM, bjolletz <daniel.akerlund@> wrote: > Hi, > > I have the following setup: > > *A border:* > > > *Panel A* (sectionBorder refers to my border component above) > > > *Panel B* (extends Panel A) > > > When I add the "someLabel" component to Panel B, the component hierarchy > will be wrong since the someLabel component will be added to the base > panel > (Panel A), but in the markup it is really located under the > "sectionBorder". > > In Wicket 1.4 I could solve this by using setTransparentResolver(true) on > the border. In Wicket 1.5 however, setTransparentResolver seems to have > been > removed. Does this mean that the setup in my example is no longer > possible, > or is there another way to do it? > > I have read the section about borders in the migration guide, but I still > dont really see how this one could be solved without > setTransparentResolver. > > Any ideas? > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Borders-and-inheritance-in-wicket-1-5-tp3965704p3965704.html > Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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] -- View this message in context: http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Borders-and-inheritance-in-wicket-1-5-tp3965704p3980989.html Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
