that sounds like a bug. if child1 is not visible then the entire enclosure should not be visible.
-igor On 10/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Another idea for RFE: > > Also I've noticed that when wicket:enclosure does not change the visibility > of ALL its child components (only the specified one), this causes unexpected > results. > > Example: > > <wicket:enclosure child='child1'> > <div wicket:id="child1"></div> > <div wicket:id="child2"></div> > </wicket:enclosure> > > In this case, I would expect that if the child1 is not visible, also child2 > would not be visible. Unfortunately the actual behavior exactly opposite: > child1 is not visible, while child2 is visible. > > > Alex Objelean wrote: > > > > Currently, wicket does not support nested wicket:enclosure tags. It would > > be very useful. What do you think? > > > > Thank you! > > Alex. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/-RFE--Nested-wicket%3Aenclosure-tf4593044.html#a13131316 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
