It's possible that the samples (I haven't verified) use templating. In that case you only see a part of the entire page. Maybe some CSS stylesheets are not declared in the the template XHTML or it only contains a single component or a subset of the page. You can work around this by adding the entire HTML page for reference outside of the template boundaries so that a designer working on that part has the entire page in his browser for reference. This extra HTML outside of the template boundaries is ignored by Wicket when rendering your template. I've used this feature a lot in the beginning to design the layout of the app, the problem with this is that you're duplicating your layout template(s) in some of your templates to see how they work together (boring), the advantage is out of container restyling (huge timesaver).
The advantage of templating outweighs this duplication. In fact you only duplicate when the need for full page reference arises. You could decide to not use templating at all, but if you do there is no elegant way to have templating work out of the container, Wicket's approach (JSF Facelets is similar iirc) gives you best of both. Another reason for the mismatch could be that some components like tables render based on collections at runtime, but I think here again you can fake some table entries in your template that Wicket ignores when rendering the real table, but I haven't tried this. Your developers and designers will have to work together anyway because if he layout of forms is changed, this needs to be reflected in the Java code as well, unless the components stay at the same parent node in the object tree. Regards, Jo On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Lenny Primak <lpri...@hope.nyc.ny.us>wrote: > > Ok, guys, having read your messages and others on the Net, > I see that many people like wicket and dislike JSF, etc. > > Perhaps I should explain the requirements better so you can point out > whether Wicket satisfies those. > We are going to be developing web apps that will be periodically > 'refreshed' > by web developers. > I tried loading the example Wicket .html pages into the browser, > or Dreamweaver, and they do not look like they do in the running > applications, > i.e. forms do not look correct with fields on different lines, etc. > I do not see how a HTML web developer/graphic designer working in > Dreamweaver/Photoshop > can give us app developers or change style of an existing web > application. > > Am I missing something here or is there an impedance mismatch? > > > > -- - Jo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
