>
>
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:25:28 +0100, Christopher Turner wrote:
>
> >To understand the rationale behind this you have to consider Wicket
> >being used in larger projects. I assume in your project that
> you are developing the HTML pages and the Java code yourself?
> In larger projects this usually does not happen. A creative
> web design team build the pages and a Java development team
> build the page logic. There is then an exercise to bind the
> pages to the logic by inserting the Wicket id values.
>
> I've been thinking about this over the past hours...
> Can you come up with good use-cases where one cannot simply
> use _javascript_ events to get a handle on the tag you're
> trying to modify? I mean, what prevents you from doing:
>
> <a >
>
> which gets you a handle and then using DOM to do any
> relative-position navigation?
>
> Gili
>
Perhaps I was not being 100% clear. My web page design team know NOTHING about wicket. I want them free to use any HTML or _javascript_ constructs that they wish, be able to utilise their existing library of _javascript_ functions (with whatever ids these already use) and tools and so on. I don't want to enforce any particular programming style, naming convention or anything on them. I would prefer that they just get on with their job of writing good looking pages. In the same way I want my development team to just worry about writing good quality Java code without having to worry about component naming conventions and so on - I want them to call a name component "name" component, not some weird made up name just in case the web team happened to already have taken the name id.
Having the wicket prefix is therefore essential for binding together the HTML pages and the Java components in a way that doesn't cause name clashes and which also makes it obvious which tags in the HTML are bound to wicket components and which is not.
Regardless of the above I would suggest that it is 'best practice' to use the wicket prefix anyway even as a sole developer. Even as a single developer working on a project, were I to leave my company then it would be much easier for another developer to pick the code and HTML up after I was gone and be immediately able to see which HTML tags bind to Wicket components and which do not. Not having the wicket prefix (or whatever you choose to call it) visible in the HTML source is a bit like writing code without comments - the only way you can understand how it works is to open all the files and look for where identical names are used!
Regards,
Chris
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
