Not sure I understand your last comments. In order to reproduce the bug, I need the relevant details though. Are you able to provide a stripped down example to me (may be even a unit test like the ones we are using in src/test/wicket/markup/parser/filter/*..*9. That would make my/our life much easier. Thanks.
Juergen On 10/16/05, Arto Arffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'll test it, but ... > > ... a PAGE template (not sure you meant it like that) (excluding > > inherited page markup as well) must not have a <wicket:head> tag. The > > purpose of <wicket:head> is for components to contribute to the page's > > <head> tag. Pages don't need that. They simply add directly to <head>. > > ... Just to add "... javascript to head-section ..." you need no > > AjaxHandler IMO. That is exactly what <wicket:head> is about. Just add > > what you want to be contributed to <head> to <wicket:head> of your > > components markup. Provided the javascript you want to add is static > > and doesn't change. But again, this might be again a misunderstanding > > due to the "example" > > yes, i know. I should have said that this is a bug. But i wasn't 100% sure > when i wrote the original mail. > > The component needs the AjaxHandler (i wont go into details). The page needs > <wicket:head> if it uses markup inheritance. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
