Hi Jeremy, Thanks for the quick reply. Is the reason I'm seeing the wicket:id in my output then that I'm working in development mode? If so, I'd say that was a nice design decision (not surprising from what else I've seen in Wicket).
Cheers, Ichiro On 9/16/10, Jeremy Thomerson <jer...@wickettraining.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Ichiro Furusato > <ichiro.furus...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm a new Wicket user and am unclear about a couple of things regarding >> what type of markup Wicket delivers to clients. Because some of the >> clients >> I work with have government guidelines restricting what document types >> are permitted (typically XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional), I'm concerned >> I might not be able to use Wicket for those projects. >> >> What I'll call "the Wicket XHTML DTD" is referenced as the XML namespace >> URI for wicket documents. As (from what I've seen) there is no stated >> DOCTYPE declaration, Wicket pages are expressed as well-formed XML only, >> even though they could likely validate according to the Wicket XHTML DTD. >> Unfortunately, for my applications I have a requirement to declare and be >> valid according to a W3C XHTML 1.0 DTD. >> >> It would seem from the unmodified comments found at the top of the Wicket >> XHTML DTD that the schema used at first glance is XHTML 1.0 Strict, e.g.: >> >> This DTD module is identified by the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers: >> >> PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" >> SYSTEM "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"; >> >> but on further investigation there have been modifications to the schema: >> the addition of some "wicket:" prefixed attributes to %coreattrs;. >> >> It's not industry practice to do that kind of thing, i.e., the header >> comments should identify the schema being expressed. If a DTD is modified >> the comments should be modified to relabel the schema. Any reference to >> the FPI (formal public identifier) for XHTML 1.0 would likewise be >> inappropriate since the Wicket schema has modified it. Even if the changes >> occur in a new XML namespace the schema is no longer XHTML 1.0 Strict and >> will not validate according to that DTD. >> >> There are a few questions/comments that come from the above: >> >> 1. Are the wicket attributes required for Wicket-based processing? >> Would removing them break existing functionality? >> >> 2. If the answer to #1 is no, could the web pages be run through a >> simple XSLT transform to remove the non-XHTML attributes? >> >> 3. If the answer to #2 is yes, I'm willing to supply the XSLT >> stylesheet, but I'm not on the developer team and couldn't based >> on my current workload volunteer, so I wouldn't be able to supply >> the code supporting that feature. >> >> 4. I am familiar with the XHTML modular DTDs and would be willing to >> supply an XHTML 1.0 DTD based on a new Wicket module, then >> "flattened" (converted into one file) based on some tools I've >> written. >> This would be a replacement for the existing Wicket XHTML DTD and >> be appropriately named, e.g., >> >> -//Apache.org//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict for Wicket 1.4//EN >> >> This DTD could of course be used to validate Wicket-produced web >> pages, but wouldn't be needed if the wicket: attributes were >> stripped from generated web pages. Ideally, Wicket would produce >> valid XHTML 1.0 Strict. I don't know if this is possible. >> >> Some clarification on this would be most appreciated, >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ichiro >> >> PS. on the whole I'm liking what I see with Wicket, esp. compared to >> Spring's increasingly complex, arcane and fragile approach to what >> should not be rocket science. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org >> >> > Wicket only generates whatever HTML you want it to generate. The only > wicket tag (or actually, attribute) you are required to use is "wicket:id", > which will automatically be removed from your HTML in deployment mode. So, > use strict XHTML in your *.html files and strict XHTML is what will be > rendered. > > -- > Jeremy Thomerson > http://www.wickettraining.com > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
