You would also need to setVisible(false) on the WMC or wicket would throw an exception at the missing child components. I use a simple class InvisibleComponent for this.
Eric Rotick wrote: > > One more thing that was suggested in class. > > Is it possible to define a Panel which had all suitable and appropriate > sub > components and then to no-op the ones that were not needed? > > So in the earlier example there could be a panel > > <wicket:panel> > > > > > </wicket:panel> > > and if the image was not needed it could be no-op'ed out by defining a > WebMarkupContainer but with no children. > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Eric Rotick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Many thanks for the clarification. >> >> As I am about to start teaching the rudiments of Wicket to a project team >> I guess the teacher should know what they are talking about. >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > you dont need a panel for the repeater itself. as for variable >> > component hierarchy inside the repeater itself, you are correct: you >> > have to either use a panel or a fragment. >> > >> > -igor >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Eric Rotick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > wrote: >> > > I thought I understood the component hierarchy but then I started to >> > tell >> > > the guys about it and now I'm not so sure. >> > > >> > > If the markup defines a hierarchy as A contains B contains C, in >> > effect, >> > > this means that C is added to B which is added to A. If we expand B >> > to be >> > > more complex we can use maybe a Panel which we identify as B but >> > inside it >> > > is BA , BB and so on. So, all the time there is a direct >> relationship >> > > between the wicket identified tags in the markup and the components >> > in the >> > > code. >> > > >> > > Now we introduce a repeater of some kind and it appears that the >> > component >> > > hierarchy is broken but it's not. So if C was a repeater and it had >> 4 >> > > children then the hierarchy is still A to B to C but within C there >> > is C to >> > > C1, C to C2 and so on. >> > > >> > > Now, if we need to have a runtime variable amount of markup which is >> > > variable, not in terms of the same markup repeated but completely >> > different >> > > markup based on some logic then we might define a Panel which >> handles >> > the >> > > variation. This is fine but what if the contents of the Panel is >> also >> > > variable. In this case further Panels are needed until the variable >> > > requirements are covered. >> > > >> > > Now the rub; although there are components, such as >> > WebMarkupContainer which >> > > can be used to group components, the use of any component which is >> > not >> > > 'transparent' must have the related wicket:id in some markup >> > somewhere. >> > > >> > > So, lets take an example where we have a list of items which can be >> > just >> > > text or a link which has an optional image. It seems that I have to >> > define >> > > panels for :- >> > > >> > > - wrapper panel for the list >> > > - a link with it's text >> > > - a link with it's text and image >> > > >> > > So we have markup such as >> > > >> > > <wicket:panel> >> > > <ul> >> > > <li wicket:id="items"/> >> > > </ul> >> > > </wicket:panel> >> > > >> > > <wicket:panel> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > </wicket:panel> >> > > >> > > <wicket:panel> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > </wicket:panel> >> > > >> > > Have I got this correct or have I gone astray somewhere? >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Question-on-component-hierarchy-tp16567888p16580692.html Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
