I don't want to butt in in the middle of something I don't totally
understand, but here is my two cents anyways:

The problem is that you cannot access an image inside a package without a
resourcereference created?

Getting back to my previous suggestion of tapestry-like services

Tapestry has an asset service that given a package-name of a resouce simply
streams it to the response so you can access any image or any other file by
constructing a simple url:

http://blahblah.com/myapp/app?service=asset&asset=wicket.example.image1.jpg

This eliminates any need for static resource references and since url is
always the same the asset gets cached by the browser.

Am I totally off the field here?

-Igor



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gili
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 3:57 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Wicket-develop] feedback refactor and paging navigation
> 
> > it is not a workaround.
> > Nobody and i really think nobody is going to add all the static 
> > resources the datepicker is needing in there application 
> including you 
> > This needs to be fixed.
> 
>       Well, all I know is... because people couldn't hit 
> screenshots off my website without constructing a Page. This 
> now works. So I'm happy. It's certainly a step in the right 
> direction. And no, I don't use the DatePicker :)
> 
> >>     Jon suggested using an XML configuration file. I 
> suggested adding 
> >> a method to components (I mistakenly said Page but I meant for all
> >> components) that allows them to return a list of all 
> resources they 
> >> wish to export. etc..
> > 
> > Yes but you still need to know WHAT components what to contribute.
> > so this must be configured/registered somehow.
> > 
> > i don't want xml either. just a simple property file.
> 
>       Ok, so I won't suggest the exact details of how to 
> accomplish this, but let me ask: why don't we declare an 
> interface which all components must implement which will make 
> this possible (a la JavaBean) as opposed to using property 
> files? I'd prefer having this sort of thing as part of the 
> Class, something I run through a compiler and gets 
> compile-time validation.
> 
> Gili
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development 
> Lifecycle Practices
> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * 
> Testing & QA
> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * 
> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-develop mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
> 
> 
> 




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop

Reply via email to