On 5/23/05, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, first of all, border-like stuff will be much easier.
I'm not sure. Because you still have something similar to <wicket>border> and <wicket:body> > When I > started playing around with Wicket, it was one of the things I found > hardest to understand. Also, being in the same hierarchy, you can just > keep on nesting components. Deep nesting however is one of the remainng problems I currently have. >This is especially handy when working with > forms. why? > And finally, with markup inheritance, it is possible to create > 'abstract' pages you can use like templates. > with <wicket:child/> being required in the base markup, inherited markup/classes are always abstract. You cannot you the base class with being subclassed. > Ofcourse, really working with it will show whether it is a good thing, > but I have high hopes ;) > > Is it comming along? Or are you having problems implementing it? > I'm currently adding additional comments regards Juergen > Cheers, > > Eelco > > > Juergen Donnerstag wrote: > > >Eelco, > > > >while reviewing the markup inheritance implementation I struggled > >finding real use cases for it. What kind of use cases do you have in > >mind? I remember we talked about the library example and border > >component used therein. But I don't remember what the advantages are > >which markup inheritance provides compared to border components. > > > >regards > >Juergen > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt12&alloc_id344&op=click _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
