actually, come to think of it, i see no reason for the wicket:remove tag other than being self-documenting. a panel /usage/ might just as well discard its body. although the panel might take the body as an argument in some future version of wicket... along with parameters. that seems like it could be really useful for reuse...
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Jonathan Locke wrote: > > oh, my bad... you guys are talking about USING panels. this makes sense > and i see no reason not to loosen the requirements on panel usage so > preview can be nicer. HOWEVER, we still need to keep the check in there > so that the wicket:remove guy won't remove anything with a /component/ as > that is a bad idea. > > On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Gili wrote: > > > > > I guess I prefer: > > > > <div id="wicket-myPanel"><wicket:remove> username:<br>password:<br> > > </wicket:remove></div> > > > > This goes against our previous requirement that certain > > components *have* to have use the open-close tag and we're loosening > > that requirement to saying: either have an open-close tag or embed a > > <wicket:remove> within. I prefer it this way because it's more > > consistent with other Wicket components I've seen. > > > > Gili > > > > On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 11:33:41 -0500, Gili wrote: > > > > >Hi, > > > > > > I think you made a typo in your RFE, otherwise I disagree with > > >your example. It reads: > > > > > ><div id="header"/><wicket:region name="panel"> ... > > > > > > I think it should read: > > > > > ><div id="header"><wicket:region name="panel"></div> > > > > > > Or, why do we need the surrounding <div> at all? > > > > > > Furthermore, for previewability I am debating with Juergen on > > >whether to use: > > > > > ><wicket:region name="panel"/><wicket:region > > >name="remove">username:<br>password:<br></wicket:region> > > > > > > or > > > > > ><wicket:region name="panel"><wicket:region > > >name="remove">username:<br>password:<br></wicket:region></wicket:region> > > > > > > > > > That is, can you embed a body within a Panel as long as it is > > >removed at runtime? I personally refer the second method of embeding a > > >removable body within the Panel. > > > > > > Another point: I don't like the fact that a region by the name > > >of "remove" or "panel" is some magical region name. My original goal > > >(as I stated in our autolink discussion) is that these names/parameters > > >should be just a normal string and should *not* automatically bind to a > > >special component type. Are you saying that there is a Wicket component > > >called "remove" on the Java end? If not, I dislike this approach. I > > >don't want to have any reserved/special names or parameters that > > >magically create components -- this sort of thing belongs within its > > >own tag such as <wicket:remove> blah </wicket:remove> > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > >Gili > > > > > >On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 01:50:42 -0800, SourceForge.net wrote: > > > > > >>Bugs item #1097047, was opened at 2005-01-06 10:50 > > >>Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item > > >>Submitter > > >>You can respond by visiting: > > >>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684975&aid=1097047&group_id=119783 > > >> > > >>Category: core > > >>Group: None > > >>Status: Open > > >>Resolution: None > > >>Priority: 7 > > >>Submitted By: Eelco Hillenius (eelco12) > > >>Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) > > >>Summary: Id's of panels do not have wicket- removed > > >> > > >>Initial Comment: > > >>While the id's of components like labels have the > > >>wicket prefix removed (e.g. <span > > >>id="wicket-myLabel">blah</span> renders <span > > >>id="myLabel">blah</span). > > >> > > >>This is not the case for panels. > > >> > > >>E.g. <div id="wicket-header"/> will render to: > > >> > > >><div id="wicket-header"/><wicket:region name="panel"> ... > > >> > > >>while it should be: > > >> > > >><div id="header"/><wicket:region name="panel"> ... > > >> > > >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > >>You can respond by visiting: > > >>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684975&aid=1097047&group_id=119783 > > >> > > >> > > >>------------------------------------------------------- > > >>The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues > > >>Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. > > >>It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt > > >>_______________________________________________ > > >>Wicket-develop mailing list > > >>[email protected] > > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues > > Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. > > It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt > > _______________________________________________ > > Wicket-develop mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues > Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. > It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt > _______________________________________________ > Wicket-develop mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop > ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
