Alle lunedì 19 marzo 2012, Chris Colman ha scritto: > I've been thinking about the new 1.5 page ID/versioning feature (which > we disabled as soon as we discovered it) and wondering if there is > actually a real world scenario for stateful pages that actually requires > this functionality. > > I understand the purpose is so that the browser's 'Back' function can > work "properly" (and maybe efficiently) but, in all the scenarios we > have at least, "proper" would be to re-render and not pull the page from > the cache. > > For example, an online store with the current shopping cart displayed in > the right hand column: > > Browser is showing page for product A, no products in shopping cart > shown in right column. > > User goes to page for product B, adds product B to shopping cart. > > Hit's back button. > > Now wouldn't the 'page versioning/id' feature now show the cached page > for product A with a shopping cart that is still empty even though the > user just added product B? Or would it realize that the shopping cart > panel's model has changed and update it to reflect the newly added item? > > In this scenario showing an empty shopping cart is a very definite > incorrect behavior that will freak out the user who believes that they > have added a product B (which they have) but it is not shown in the > shopping cart. > > 1.4 functionality (without page ID) worked fine. We never had a single > complaint about back button not displaying the correct result. > > I'm half doubting whether page ID is a useful feature but half wondering > if it is a useful feature for which I just haven't discovered useful > scenarios where it is of benefit and so I should find these scenarios > and change my design to use it. > > Thoughts? I support you! I implemented class NoVersionMount thanks to pointbreak in my MainApplication. And It will be my template for future app. But to do it, I needed to understood the problem, check on google, read a lot of pages, without found a solution, so post the question here, and after 3 post, got a right reply for me. Why an wicket user have to do all this???? Why not, wicket use the NoVersionMount as default Mount? Like in wicket 1.4. And implement an VersionMount as an alternative for developer?
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
