> the entire point of having a page stateless is that it stores nothing in > session. if we are storing the buffer it eliminates the point.
Storing the buffer in the session has nothing to do with pages being stateless. I agree the net-result is the same, but it doesn't have to be like that. > but we do need to apply it to get. the point of redirect after post pattern > is to present the user only with read-only urls. that means refreshing the > page does not cause any action to be performed only data read from the db or > whatever. so we need to do this even for links because we should not have > the interface invocation left in the url since refreshing the page will > again perform the action on the link. Yeah, agreed. I wasn't saying I was against the pattern nor against applying it to GETs (though protocol zealots would disagree here). What I am saying is that we don't have to apply that pattern anyway. If you just rendered a bookmarkable page, and push refresh and the creation of that bookmarkable page is triggered again... fine! No problem at all. I'm not talking about forms and (internal) links etc, because they would be on pages that couldn't be stateless anyway. I am talking about bookmarkable pages without any callbacks on them and possibly other cases if we can think of them (though I can't at the moment). Eelco ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid3432&bid#0486&dat1642 _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list Wicket-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
