I've been having some very brief communication with Ralf Eichinger who
has been making a valuable contribution over the last few weeks by
starting to improve documentation on the Wiki, especially with a view
to help people evaluating Wicket get a fairer appreciation of it,
who's using it and what they are doing with it.
Now obviously it is extremely valuable for newcomers to have a page
like our "Websites based on Wicket" [1] to get a feel for who's
doing what with Wicket already. And, for apps built on Wicket, like
"Leg Up" and all those other Wicket sites, it is nice to have a
central place to put a link on that others may come across and
therefore be aware it's out there, and enjoy visiting/using it.
It's also encouraging to see this list of apps and sites grows,
albeit steadily (I recommend anyone with a public Wicket app to
mention it there, it can only do good for all concerned, AFAICS).
All the same, there are increasingly more sophisticated and
impressive sites highlighting the strength and depth of the
community/developers and what magic can be weaved using Wicket
(whilst developers amongst us also know that in Wicket such magic
is possible at the same time as keeping your application design
and code neat, tidy, maintainable and extensible and even rather
pleasant to work with).
One question that came up is whether the pages listed by URL there
should be ordered alphabetically or chronologically.
For me, chronological (newest at top, as had been the case originally)
makes much more sense because when I look at the site, I can see how
things have evolved, quickly identify what's new since I last looked
and also answer questions like "what were the first public Wicket
sites listed here?". This is also a much more robust sorting scheme
(people _like_ to add their shiny new apps/sites to the top of the
list!) and with no arbitrary rules there's not such a likelihood of
breaking the sort order every time anyone adds their site (eg should
http://www.eropuit.nl go before or after fabulously40.com), as it was
when I went in to add LegUp.
Chronological ordering is a scheme that was always quite naturally
maintained and therefore required no further maintenance to keep
right. What's more, I don't see what the benefit of an artificial
sort ordering like "alphabetically ordered by URL" would be in this
context as I doubt anyone looking at the page is not familiar with
Ctrl+F if they come looking for some specific page/site/URL.
I doubt anyone else has ever been worried about this, but if
anyone else has a view on it I'd be pleased to know about
it and if there are some good reasons for alphabetically
ordering too the list that I have missed I can stop messing up
Ralf's order!
Regards - Cemal
jWeekend
OO & Java Technologies, Wicket Training and Development
http://jWeekend.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
