I don't think current behavior is the best one. Even if it can be
"corrent", it lacks convenience.
I suggest a flag on web markup container, that could change the way
invisible component is rendered. Default could be, that it's not
rendered at all. So it would not break any code. You could change it
though, to render invisible component as <componentTag
style="display:none" id="..."></componentTag>. This would work for
both ajax and regular renders, so that you could render invisible
component and later make it visible with ajax request.
-Matej
On 3/19/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it seems taht this kind of construction is used to make workaround of
> the bug. Is'n it?
First, what bug? I don't know that this is a bug? I thought we are
discussing a feature here. Secondly, this is not a workaround, but
creating client side code based on a API contract: setVisible(false)
removes the component markup completely, including its tags, from the
final markup.
It is based on the assumption that some element is *NOT* present at
all. Your change will invert that behavior, and in such a way that it
is only detectable by debugging your javascript. Not something I
enjoy, nor 95% of the development community.
You must understand that this is a major api break, not something
minor. This is not detectable by a compiler. You *will* break existing
scripts, pages and applications in a non-obvious way. Silent failures
are something we try to avoid at all cost.
Martijn
On 3/19/07, Vincent Demay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martijn Dashorst a écrit :
> > Currently everybody assumes (correctly) that the element is completely
> > removed (Ajax and non-Ajax)
> Yes of course, but it is the same for all workarounds ;)
> When to change servlet to filter, users have to change their web xml.
> Each time you change something users have to adapt their code
> > i.e. not present in the final markup.
> > This means that scripts that iterate through the dom, or check for the
> > document.getElementById() == null will fail if we implement this.
> >
> it seems taht this kind of construction is used to make workaround of
> the bug. Is'n it?
> > I *strongly* discourage changing this behavior.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > On 3/19/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Will it? This seems to be actually quite a smart workaround. How
> >> exactly will this break existing clients? Only thing i'm concerned
> >> about is the validity of output markup. but imho when we preserve the
> >> original tag names, e.g. td will render as td, it should be all right.
> >>
> >> -Matej
> >>
> >> On 3/19/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > So you mean:
> >> >
> >> > Label l = Label("foo", "hello");
> >> > renders:
> >> > <span wicket:id="foo">hello</span>
> >> >
> >> > ... some ajax stuff, or a normal page render:
> >> >
> >> > l.setVisible(false);
> >> > renders:
> >> > <span wicket:id="foo" style="display:none"></span>
> >> > ?
> >> >
> >> > This can and will break existing clients in a very nasty manner,
> >> > because the markup id is still present in the final markup.
> >> >
> >> > Martijn
> >> >
> >> > On 3/19/07, Vincent Demay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > Johan Compagner a écrit :
> >> > > >> > Also always just rendering the component but use the style
> >> to make in
> >> > > >> > invisible
> >> > > >> > could be a security problem. So that can't be the default.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> What do you mean by security problem?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > If the the component that is set to none visible is none visible
> >> > > > because of
> >> > > > security
> >> > > > So it has data that never should be send to the browser because
> >> the
> >> > > > user is
> >> > > > not allowed
> >> > > > to see it.
> >> > >
> >> > > But data is never send to the user because a none visible
> >> component will
> >> > > be render as an empty tag, so without data
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com
> >> > Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
> >> > Wicket 1.2.5 will keep your server alive. Download Wicket now!
> >> > http://wicketframework.org
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com
Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
Wicket 1.2.5 will keep your server alive. Download Wicket now!
http://wicketframework.org
