Jon Laidler wrote: > > True separation of concerns is the mantra we should use when asked why > Wicket. Let web designers do their magic with web site design, and leave > Java coders handle the components. >
I think Wicket sells itself short if it emphasises only the designer-developer separation as its main use case. This is indeed an extremely strong core feature, and the best selling point for the use case in question (labour divided between designers & developers). However, I suspect I'm not alone in working for a company where that division of labour does not exist - we have only developers, no designers as such. Does this mean Wicket loses much of its power, or is not an ideal fit? Far from it, as we can follow a slightly different path, which is no less powerful for our use case. We never open the templates in any kind of designer app (or even in a browser for a quick look). Instead we make heavy use of panels, borders, component inheritance and markup inheritance, to achieve a very tight and maintainable codebase. All fully covered by junit tests using WicketTester, with Spring beans mocked via EasyMock. This maintainability is extremely important to us, moreso than the designer-developer split. Anytime I'm selling wicket, I emphasise both use cases (and yes, I realise they're not necessarily mutually exclusive)... -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/wicket-did-not-make-the-grade.-tf3869999.html#a10984022 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
