On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:25:28 +0100, Christopher Turner wrote:
>Additionally, once the application has been built, the HTML pages will still
>generally be maintained by the creative web design team. If all components
>just have an id field with no prefix then it is difficult for them to
>distinguish which HTML tags they can mess with and which ones they should not
>mess with without liaising with the Java development team. Therefore the
>prefix is very useful in communicating this information across multiple teams.
>From a maintenance point of view I also find it very useful to have the wicket
>prefix when I come back to maintain HTML pages that I wrote some months ago
>and can't remember exactly what they do any more!
But this is something you can control as the developer. I
mean... I think by default Wicket should not require any prefix in the
ID tag. What you see is on the HTML side should be what you see on the
Java end (ID-wise).
Now, in your bigger company, should you wish to adopt a special
naming convention for Wicket components you're always free to do so. I
just prefer we remove any magic operations and keep the HTML and Wicket
view as consistent as possible.
Gili
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
