Wicket is a component framework. A reusable component might be one which has the html form element in its markup. I want to reuse this component in every possible place. This might even be inside a component which is another form. I really don't care where it is. I don't care when I create my reusable component and I don't care, when I use this component somewhere. If I had to, this would be counter-intuitive.
Dirk 2006/11/6, Ryan Sonnek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
My vote is to not allow for inner forms either. It's too much framework "magic". Wicket is a web framework, and html doesn't allow for nested forms, so this seems totally counter-intuitive. On 11/6/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > but how does this happen? > why is the panel that has the search box and the button put _inside_ > another > form? > > let me give you the opposite example: > right now i create a lot of editor objects that are panels with > formcomponents. it would be great if i could have the panel also have a > form > so i can use an editor by itself and not need an external form. > > which usecase is more common? > > -igor > > > On 11/6/06, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I already did that in that other thread. > > > > One outer form where you can edit some database data and submit it > > and an inner form that is just a search box so field and button'. > > Then if i submit the edit for the outer form i really don't want to > > process > > the inner form.. > > That inner form could be for example to search a value for that outer > > form. > > > > So i am: > > [X] Yes, don't process those pesky little fields > > > > to me it just doesn't make sense if you do it the other way why have > that > > inner form > > where is the usecase for that? That one i can't think of immediately > > > > johan > > > > > > On 11/6/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > i would like to see a real world usecase where you would have nested > > forms > > > but will not want to process the inner when the outer is submitted. > > > > > > -igor > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/06, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > People, people! > > > > > > > > I just don't get it. By no means I want to generate invalid input. > > When > > > > using nested forms only the toplevel form is generated as <form>. > All > > > > nested forms are just <div>s in html. > > > > > > > > The only difference is how the form is processed. If a nested form > is > > > > submitted, user input in all fields in entire form is persisted, > only > > > > the submitted form gets really processed. This is IMHO a great > feature > > > > and allows us to create components that are totally independent, e.g > . > > > > they don't have to care whether they are put in form or not, they > can > > > > contain their own form and everything will work as expected. > > > > > > > > All those remarks about getting against standard are just... well... > > > > uninformed. We don't render anything against standard compliance. We > > > > don't render things like > > > > > > > > <form> > > > > ... > > > > <form> > > > > ... > > > > > > > > -Matej > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nick Heudecker wrote: > > > > > I'm -1 on allowing nested forms, and +1 on throwing a runtime > error > > if > > > > this > > > > > condition is encountered. Non-binding. > > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/06, Korbinian Bachl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> shame on me ... > > > > >> > > > > >> now serious > > > > >> > I think the way we treat nested forms in 2.0 and 1.3 a real > > > > >> > improvement and a showcase for component frameworks: work > > > > >> > around problems in an elegant and meaningful way. Abstract > > > > >> > away the limitations of the protocols we have to work with. > > > > >> > > > > >> i think this is a big danger - remember: most wicket users come > > from > > > a > > > > >> point > > > > >> of GUI building, they dont know the limitations of http, html, > css, > > > > >> ajax - > > > > >> this ends usually up in trouble (security, locked out browsers, > > > > >> unusability, > > > > >> load, not barrer free...) > > > > >> > > > > >> my personal way is to always stick to standards - it might be > > harder > > > > >> sometimes to achive this, but youre on a save side... > > > > >> > > > > >> Regards > > > > >> > > > > >> Korbinian > > > > >> > > > > >> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > > >> > Von: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 5. November 2006 22:00 > > > > >> > An: [email protected] > > > > >> > Betreff: Re: Re: [VOTE] Nested forms - don't process inner > > > > >> > form fields in outer form submit > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On 11/5/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> > > > The vote: don't process inner form fields when the outer > form > > > is > > > > >> > > > submitted [ ] Yes, don't process those pesky little > > > > >> > fields [ ] No, > > > > >> > > > process them as if they were part of the outer form > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > I'm still not crazy about the whole concept, but I guess > > > > >> > nested forms > > > > >> > > can be useful sometimes. I just hope we don't open up > > > > >> > another can of > > > > >> > > worms. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hmmm.... breakfast. We already allow nested forms, but we > > > > >> > don't do anything about it, and these fail horribly at the > > > > >> > moment as Korbinian reminds us of constantly. The only other > > > > >> > option would be to check the markup and throw a runtime > > > > >> > exception that nesting is not allowed. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I think the way we treat nested forms in 2.0 and 1.3 a real > > > > >> > improvement and a showcase for component frameworks: work > > > > >> > around problems in an elegant and meaningful way. Abstract > > > > >> > away the limitations of the protocols we have to work with. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > My vote: > > > > >> > > [ x ] Yes, don't process those pesky little fields > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > as that is more explicit/ less magic. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks for the vote. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Martijn > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -- > > > > >> > <a > > > > >> > href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket > > > ">Vote</a> > > > > >> > for <a > > > > >> > href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket > > > ">Wicket</a> > > > > >> > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best > > > > >> > Stuff in the World!</a> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
