It should work fine listview will not get rendered when you set it to none visible.
And yes (talking to igor) i think it is a bit stupid that we do generate the items when the listview is not visible..
johan
On 5/18/06, Alvar Lumberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bruno, your problem is more of an issue with code beauty and design? I
agree that it's a bit misleading to have an setVisible method that
does nothing... As adding a fairly synthetic AjaxComponent subclass to
Component for using as a parent for every ajax-enabled component
doesn't seem justified, what if ListView (and other possible
repeaters) would throw UnsupportedOperationException or something like
that?
Of course, that would mean making Component.setVisible not final...
Alvar
On 5/18/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i disagree,
> wicket's primary usecase is not ajax, but regular rendering. ajax is a very
> nice bonus and does not always work as smoothly as we would like.
>
> now the ajax solution for the listview is quiet easy, put it into a
> webmarkupcontainer and update that container instead of the listview via
> ajax
>
> WebMarkupContainer listviewcontainer=new
> WebMarkupContainer("listviewcontainer");
> ListView listview=new ListView("listview", .....
>
> listviewContainer.add (listview);
>
> <span wicket:id="listviewcontainer"><ul><li
> wicket:id="listview">blah</li></ul></span>
>
> ... target.addComponent(listviewcontainer);
>
> this has the added advantage of hiding the listview's container, be that a
> ul or a table
>
> -Igor
>
>
>
> On 5/17/06, Bruno Borges < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > one thing we might try is to add an isvisible check to
> internalOnAttach() so that lsitview does not create children if it is not
> visible. johan what do you think?
> > >
> >
> >
> > Igor, the problem is that we need to make possible the call for
> setVisible(false), just like any other component... _after_ the component
> was printed out (for example, hidding a list view within an AjaxLink).
> >
> > If this can't be done, ListView must be of other type except Component.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/17/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Sure, I know about that, but the way we code for other things like
> Label or TextField, it works, right? So, for ListView it should work too.
> It's a component just like other.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > listview is very much different from ordinary components like label and
> textfield. listview is a repeater. repeaters have no markup of their own and
> they produce no markup.
> > >
> > > the markup you assign to the listview using wicket:id the listview
> delegates to its children. the markup you see in the output generated by
> listview does not come from the listview itself, but from its children that
> render themselves.
> > >
> > > one thing we might try is to add an isvisible check to
> internalOnAttach() so that lsitview does not create children if it is not
> visible. johan what do you think?
> > >
> > > -Igor
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bruno Borges
> > Summa Technologies
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmdlnk&kid0709&bid&3057&dat1642
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
