---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sebastien <seb...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 3:19 AM
Subject: Re: wicket:containers as ajax targets
To: shadders....@gmail.com


Yes it will and yes this is valid

<!ELEMENT TABLE <http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#edef-TABLE> - -
     (CAPTION?, (COL*|COLGROUP*), THEAD?, TFOOT?, TBODY+)>

http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/sgml/dtd.html

However, you should know that you can not reattach the listview to the
ajaxrequesttarget, you should add its container (the table for instance)...

Hope this help,
Sebastien.



On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Steve <shadders....@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Wouldn't that result in multiple tbody tags?  Is that valid?
>
>
> On 18/01/14 11:27, Sebastien wrote:
>
>   Hi,
>
>  You can use, tbody as a replacement for wicket:container
>
>  Best regards,
>  Sebastien
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Steve <shadders....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if there's a better solution to the way I've been solving
>> a particular problem. When using listviews within a table I quite often
>> do something like this:
>>
>> <table>
>>     <wicket:container wicket:id="list">
>>         <tr>
>>             <td>row 1</td>
>>         </tr>
>>
>>         <tr>
>>             <td>row 2</td>
>>         </tr>
>>     </wicket:container>
>> </table>
>>
>> The reason I don't attach the listview directly to the <tr> tag is
>> because I need multiple rows per list item.  This works just fine except
>> where you want to use a listitem as an ajax target.  If you use
>> setOutputMarkupPlaceholderTag(true) on the wicket container wicket
>> throws a very annoying warning in developer mode which (quite rightly)
>> points out that wicket:container shouldn't be rendered.  Using a <div>
>> or a <span> as the placeholder produces invalid html and browsers often
>> don't render it properly.  wicket:container is probably also invalid but
>> at least produces the results you'd expect from the table in the browser.
>>
>> Is there a better way to do this?  It would be nice if HTML had it's own
>> NOOP tag that does nothing and can be validly placed anywhere for
>> containing a block of elements.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to