also, i can see an argument that this really belongs in the wicket package rather than wicket.markup. as far as the API goes, it seems like it's more related to Component than to the markup classes.
thoughts?
Jonathan Locke wrote:
i realize this is a fairly gratuitous change idea, but is there any value in the ComponentTag prefix on this class? it quickly becomes obvious in wicket that you can only modify component tags. so, wouldn't AttributeModifier be just as good and shorter to boot?
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
