> Sounds good. Does that mean it's all page centric then? One of the 
> things I would really like, is that you could include the bean editor as 
> a Panel, that works regardless of what is more on your page.

I think panels are best for reusability, too.  Then, custom pages can
wrap the panel in a border or put several panels together on a page
(or whatever).

>> One thing that would help is to be able to "bookmark" instances as you
>> browse them.  These can be candidates for adding to a relationship (like
>> adding an employee to a manager, etc).  Or just for speedier access to
>> the instances you use most frequently.
>
> Great idea. Not sure how exactly that would look though.

I'm thinking of bean list panel that allows you to dynamically filter
on one or more attributes (for making very large tables manageable.  I
wrote a list panel like this, but the data access assumes the Cayenne
flexibility of dynamically creating queries using Java.  I'm not sure
Hibernate is quite as flexible, but I'd be glad to be wrong on that.) 
A check-box in each row would allow you to bookmark instances.  These
bookmarked instances could be put into a drop-down on the edit panels
of related objects.

I can send you an image of what I'm talking about (for the list
filtering).  If you are interested, I can send you my list panel code
with the dynamic query-builder classes.  I think I documented them
pretty well, at least at the class level.  The columns in my list
panel are not generic yet (you still have to specify the individual
columns in the HTML) but the dynamic query builder code wouldn't
change much except to make it more generic for other persistence
mechanisms.

I really think it is possible to create a few well-crafted editing and
list panels (using the flexibility of OGNL, dynamic queries, and
modern ORM tools) that would allow relatively easy management of
almost any data schema.  When I was a kid, my grandma taught me 3 or 4
chords on a ukelele.  Those simple chords could be used to accompany
any song, she said.  That made a big impression on me at the time.  In
our case, though, the tricky part is to keep the panels relatively
simple without sacrificing critical features.

> Cool. I think the smartest thing is to start a new project for it in 
> wicket-stuff. I'll try to start that up tonight.

Would there be any reason to keep the basic, generic, BeanPanel and
BeanListPanel stuff in wicket-extensions, then have the uber-project
in wicket-stuff?  Either way is fine with me.

- Jonathan Carlson


>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-12 2:21:36 AM >>>
Jonathan Carlson wrote:

>I think you are right, it does get complex rather quickly.
>
>I've played with having a tab panel for related objects.  Mine sat
>right below the edit form.  It worked pretty well.  One-to-many
>relationship tabs have a pageable table of related instances. 
>One-to-one relationship tabs just have an editable form for the related
>object.  It makes for a larger page object, but it feels natural to me
>to keep related stuff together on the same page.

Sounds good. Does that mean it's all page centric then? One of the 
things I would really like, is that you could include the bean editor as 
a Panel, that works regardless of what is more on your page.

>One thing that would help is to be able to "bookmark" instances as you
>browse them.  These can be candidates for adding to a relationship (like
>adding an employee to a manager, etc).  Or just for speedier access to
>the instances you use most frequently.

Great idea. Not sure how exactly that would look though.

>I'm interested in helping out since I need to do this anyways, but I'd
>probably push towards a more  full-fledged project.
>  
>

Cool. I think the smartest thing is to start a new project for it in 
wicket-stuff. I'll try to start that up tonight.

Eelco

>- Jonathan Carlson
>
>
>  
>
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-11 4:45:03 PM >>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>I've been thinking a bit more about the bean panel, and I'm kind of 
>stuck. That is, there's too many possibilities!
>
>A simple bean is no problem. I have code in CVS for that now and it 
>works (with a special case, FieldPanel, which lets you select a subset
>
>of the properties of the bean). The problem starts when you think about
>
>the more complex properties. E.g. a Person object that has an Address
>as 
>a property. Usually, you'd want to give the Address its own edit form.
>
>But probably not in the same page as the Person form is (things would 
>get messy pretty quickly). So, say you'd want to navigate to address 
>edit from person edit. The current implementation I had was just a
>bunch 
>of fields, no form, which has the advantage that you can decide to nest
>
>it in any form you like. Also it had no buttons (cancel, save), just
>the 
>fields. Thing is, that we need the form and the buttons if we'd want to
>
>support the object browsing. And if we build that, we are allready 
>halfway a Trails application.
>
>So, what do you guys think? What direction should the bean panel 
>experiment head? Who is interested in cooperating, and where should we
>
>put it (in wicket-stuff, so that it can be a seperate full-fledged 
>project with more people working on it, or in extensions in case we
>keep 
>it really simple)?
>
>Eelco


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the 'Do More With Dual!' webinar happening
July 14 at 8am PDT/11am EDT. We invite you to explore the latest in dual
core and dual graphics technology at this free one hour event hosted by HP,
AMD, and NVIDIA.  To register visit http://www.hp.com/go/dualwebinar
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user

Reply via email to