Yes, perhaps a better way to avoid overloading the word "Model" or "ModelObject" is to use those words to refer to that which is wrapped (usually a non-wicket oriented business object), and use something else for the class which does the wrapping and provides access to the wicket page component.
However, I'm not that keen on the name IModelLocator, as the current IModel does many things other than merely locating the model. It provides string-based access methods to the model's parts; it handles persistance or detachability, etc. So I'd prefer to make get/setModel methods of an interface named IModelManager or IModelWrapper. The verbs "Manage" and "Wrap" are still somewhat vague, but there's only so much that can be done to tersely document a class that does well lots more than just one thing. At least IModelManager or IModelWrapper are not ambiguous (as is "ModelObject"), and avoids overloading the word "Model". -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Locke Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:55 AM To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] VOTE: IModel and 'model object' name change what do you think of gustav and eelco's IModelLocator / get/setModel idea? Frank Silbermann wrote: > > > I don't care much for getValue() because to me the word "value" > suggests "atomic value" (or even "atomic constant") -- which is not > the general case. > > At first I thought of recommending getBusinessObject() to distinguish > the result from the framework-oriented model classes, but that could > be confusing if it were common practices to embed wicket models inside > of wicket models (the Decorator pattern). If that's they case, I > would deprecate getModelObject() and replace it with getUnwrappedModel(). > > (Obviously, wicket documentation must somewhere explain the necessity > of _wrapping_ business objects in Wicket model classes to be accessed > by wicket components. Once that process is understood, multiple > levels of wrapping should not be too difficult to understand.) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Jonathan Locke > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 11:35 AM > To: wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] VOTE: IModel and 'model object' name change > > > > yeah. i agree. if we did anything it would be better to change > IModel as i said, but then just deprecate getModelObject() and add a > preferred version as > getModelValue() as johan suggested. this would only break code that > directly uses IModel (a more limited number of users). > > > Eelco Hillenius wrote: >> >> I voted -1, but here is my opinion about the change proper. >> >>> public interface IModel<V> extends IDetachable { >>> V getValue(); >>> void setValue(V value); >>> } >> >> This would be for the better imo, though I don't hate the original >> getObject *that* much. It's just what you are used to and I think >> documentation on how models should be used is a lot more important. >> >> >>> we would also change getModelObject() to getValue() as well as any > other >>> related methods like getModelObjectAsString() to getValueAsString() > (or >>> valueAsString() if preferred). there might be naming conflicts > somewhere >>> or >>> other problems, but i don't know of any offhand. >> >> Tbh, I actually don't think Component#getValue is for the better. I >> think Component#getModelObject is way clearer than Component#getValue. >> In the end I think both value and object are ambiguous, and this >> should be fixed by documentation and examples. >> >> Btw, If there is *anything* I never liked about the whole model >> business, it is the fact that Component has methods to get the model >> value in the first place (getModelObject etc). >> >> The indirection that IModel provides is something to get used to. It >> is one of the places where we traded clarity and simplicity for >> flexibility. I think it'll be hard to grasp for newbies no matter the >> naming, so the better our documentation and examples are, the quicker >> they will be able to wrap their head around it. >> >> Eelco >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > - >> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join >> SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to > share >> your >> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn >> cash >> > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV > DE > V >> _______________________________________________ >> Wicket-user mailing list >> Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/revising-the-%22Working-with-Wicket-models%22-pa > ge > -tf3016921.html#a8526349 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > - > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn > cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV > DE > V > _______________________________________________ > Wicket-user mailing list > Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn > cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV > DEV _______________________________________________ > Wicket-user mailing list > Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/revising-the-%22Working-with-Wicket-models%22-page -tf3016921.html#a8526796 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDE V _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
