On 5/19/07, Sean Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What was the result of this vote? Is EmptyPanel going to be added to Wicket
1.3?
Just added.
Eelco
What was the result of this vote? Is EmptyPanel going to be added to Wicket
1.3?
On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
so i propose a vote to add this. i'm +1.
* Jonathan Locke:
>
>
> so i propose a vote to add this. i'm +1.
+1
I have one in every project.
It is particularly useful for a reusable modal dialog that is
defined in the page, and replaced/shown in various forms.
--
Jean-Baptiste Quenot
aka John Banana Qwerty
http://caraldi.com/j
On 5/5/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You're right about that. EmptyPanel is better, and it should probably be final.
Yes, I think EmptyPanel has the merit of being more obvious in its
intent, and less error prone.
Xavier
Eelco
On 5/5/07, Igor Vaynberg <[E
You're right about that. EmptyPanel is better, and it should probably be final.
Eelco
On 5/5/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
will that really make things better? if you misname the markup file you will
now get component not found rather then markup not found.
-igor
eed of adding EmptyPanel, and anyone subclassing
Panel would override it by supplying their own markup.
Martijn
On 5/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1, another class I can remove from our project :)
>
> On 5/5/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
That's actually not a bad idea. Xavier, you think you would have found
that/ is it as obvious?
Eelco
On 5/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How about giving Panel.java an accompanying Panel.html file? That
would obviate the need of adding EmptyPanel, and anyone
How about giving Panel.java an accompanying Panel.html file? That
would obviate the need of adding EmptyPanel, and anyone subclassing
Panel would override it by supplying their own markup.
Martijn
On 5/5/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1, another class I can remove fr
t;
> On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In my work project, I've added and frequently use an EmptyPanel which is
>> simply a panel with empty markup. Although you can do the same thing
>> with
>> WebMarkupContainer or implement th
t one extra class.
>
> Eelco
>
>
> On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In my work project, I've added and frequently use an EmptyPanel which
is
>> simply a panel with empty markup. Although you can do the same thing
>> with
>
n't agree back then, but I still think
> > it's much easier for users to discover something just because it has
> > an obvious name, and not to worry about that one extra class.
> >
> > Eelco
> >
> >
> > On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTE
IL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In my work project, I've added and frequently use an EmptyPanel which is
>> simply a panel with empty markup. Although you can do the same thing
>> with
>> WebMarkupContainer or implement this yourself, it does seem like a nice
>
t I still think
> it's much easier for users to discover something just because it has
> an obvious name, and not to worry about that one extra class.
>
> Eelco
>
>
> On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> In my work project, I&#x
vious name, and not to worry about that one extra class.
Eelco
On 5/4/07, Jonathan Locke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In my work project, I've added and frequently use an EmptyPanel which is
simply a panel with empty markup. Although you can do the same thing with
WebMarkupContainer
In my work project, I've added and frequently use an EmptyPanel which is
simply a panel with empty markup. Although you can do the same thing with
WebMarkupContainer or implement this yourself, it does seem like a nice
conceptual addition, particularly for newbies who might not think &quo
15 matches
Mail list logo
