i'll buy this. +1 +1
Juergen Donnerstag wrote:
+1 wicket.markup.html.list.ListView +1 wicket.markup.html.list.PageableListView
Juergen
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 22:01:40 +0100, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i vote for
wicket.markup.html.list.ListView and wicket.markup.html.list.PageableListView
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
Which is a good argument for not calling it a list, as (fat) changes are you'll be using both in the same classes. This is not a problem with packages however.
Eelco
Jonathan Locke wrote:
yeah, but the component itself is called ListView not List for the reason that it conflicts with java.util.List
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
But it is allready in the wicket.markup.html space, so it is obvious that we're talking about components here. I don't like the 'view' part here, as it seems a bit out of sync with the other package names.
Eelco
Jonathan Locke wrote:
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
I'm +1.
Also, we should rename the package (list?) as well imo.
yes, but its listview i think not list (which is a data structure rather than a component)
I'll be out for two days (be back tuesday evening)... could someone please send an email to the user's list about any changes to the table package. There's a few devs of Topicus currently working on CVS-head that follow the user's list, but that do not follow this list. Thanks in advance.
Eelco
Jonathan Locke wrote:
this package may have the features we want, but it's gotten sloppy. i think we ought to refactor it so it becomes consistent in terms of naming. also, there are some confusing API issues to resolve. like what is the different between SortableTableHeaderGroup and SortableTableHeaders? should both of these be public?
we went and changed the naming for half this package, so why not finish the job? i see no reason for the name Table to be used at all now.
Table* -> PageableListView*
either that, or push all the Pageable functionality up into ListView so all ListViews are pageable. that would reduce the surface area of the API at the expense of an int or two worth of data.
btw, why not use viewSize instead of rowsPerPage? that variable
should be sufficient.
let's see if we can't boil this all down some more. it will be a
very commonly used set of classes. as it stands its a little too
Baroque for my tastes. ;-)
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt _______________________________________________ Wicket-develop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
