-1. Regardless of whether the change is for the better, it will break
way too much existing code not to mention the tutorials on the
internet etc.
Eelco
On 1/22/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> i'd like us to vote on changing IModel to this in 2.0 (i know it's very
> late, but please at least read my argument below and think about it for a
> moment):
>
> public interface IModel<V> extends IDetachable
> {
> V getValue();
> void setValue(V value);
> }
>
> we would also change getModelObject() to getValue() as well as any other
> related methods like getModelObjectAsString() to getValueAsString() (or
> valueAsString() if preferred). there might be naming conflicts somewhere or
> other problems, but i don't know of any offhand.
>
> i realize we're about to enter beta, but i feel like this matters since our
> users have been telling us for some time now that models are hard to
> understand and it seems likely that the term 'model object' (as derived from
> the IModel interface naming) is really not helping anyone to understand
> things. in fact, that term is actually ambiguous since the object
> implementing IModel might be informally understood to be the model object
> (which is not what we mean).
>
> i realize this change would affect the book and so eelco and martijn may
> very understandably not want to deal with that so i won't be upset if this
> change can't happen. but i'd like to see it if it's possible, so at any
> rate, i'm +1 and i think igor says he's +0.
>
>
> Jonathan Locke wrote:
> >
> >
> > We did already break the model contract with 1.2/1.3... would
> > get/setObject->get/setValue be a huge hassle? Or am I spacing something
> > here?
> >
> >
> > Jonathan Locke wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Made a few more changes. I think it's getting shorter/better.
> >>
> >> My one regret looking at this documentation is that I wish
> >> IModel.get/setObject were actually IModel.get/setValue. Or was there
> >> some crazy reason we didn't do this? It would be much easier and more
> >> natural to talk about a model's value this way...
> >>
> >>
> >> Jonathan Locke wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Nice work. I made a few small changes and rephrased the first paragraph
> >>> to be even more specific. Maybe it could be tweaked a little more, but
> >>> I think this sums it up better now:
> >>>
> >>> "In Wicket, a model holds a value for a component to display and/or
> >>> edit. How exactly this value is held is determined by a given model's
> >>> implementation of the wicket.model.IModel interface. This interface
> >>> decouples a component from the data which forms its value. This in turn
> >>> decouples the whole Wicket framework from any and all details of model
> >>> storage, such as the details of a given persistence technology. As far
> >>> as Wicket itself is concerned, a model is anything that implements the
> >>> IModel interface, no matter how it might do that."
> >>>
> >>> It does feel like this is the best place to show the IModel interface
> >>> since readers will be wondering what it looks like already. It sounds
> >>> scarier than it is, so why delay?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Loren Rosen wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I've saved my rewritten version. (See
> >>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Working+with+Wicket+models)
> >>>> Comments by everyone from experts to complete newbies
> >>>> are most welcome. Doubtless there are things that are confusing or
> >>>> flat-out wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> In addition to rephrasing or rewriting a lot of material, and adding a
> >>>> few things, I
> >>>> excised some details I thought would be distracting for a beginner.
> >>>> Some of this
> >>>> material is, I think, still useful, perhaps in a slightly more advanced
> >>>> "More about
> >>>> Models" page.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> igor.vaynberg wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> go ahead and edit the page...the wiki is versioned i think so we can
> >>>>> always
> >>>>> roll back.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> when you are done with the majority let us know and we will review the
> >>>>> changes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -igor
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 1/15/07, Loren Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> When I first started using Wicket I found the information on models a
> >>>>>> little
> >>>>>> hard to follow. So now I'd like to revise the "Working with Wicket
> >>>>>> models"
> >>>>>> wiki page
> >>>>>> (
> >>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Working+with+Wicket+models
> >>>>>> )
> >>>>>> to improve this. I'd be happy to outline what I think should be
> >>>>>> improved
> >>>>>> (though this is a little hard to do in detail short of simply
> >>>>>> annotating
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> page) or I can just plunge ahead and draft a revised page. If I do
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> latter I could potentially post it somewhere else for comment instead
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> directly replacing the existing page on the wiki. Perhaps we need a
> >>>>>> 'in
> >>>>>> draft' part of the wiki for working on long pages like this one.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Actually, another alternative is for me to gradually introduce
> >>>>>> changes to
> >>>>>> the wiki page over a span of days, giving people a chance to comment
> >>>>>> as I
> >>>>>> go.
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> View this message in context:
> >>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/revising-the-%22Working-with-Wicket-models%22-page-tf3016921.html#a8378321
> >>>>>> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> >>>>>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
> >>>>>> share
> >>>>>> your
> >>>>>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn
> >>>>>> cash
> >>>>>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Wicket-user mailing list
> >>>>>> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> >>>>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
> >>>>> share your
> >>>>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> >>>>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Wicket-user mailing list
> >>>>> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/revising-the-%22Working-with-Wicket-models%22-page-tf3016921.html#a8516354
> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Wicket-user mailing list
> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
