As a long-time Tapestry user (but very new Wicket user), I have a few thoughts about in-line component declaration.
1.) Even in a framework like Tapestry where the idiom is fully supported, it can lead to complex and difficult to maintain templates. In fact, it's generally discouraged in Tapestry for those reasons. 2.) Providing a fundamentally different, optional way to declare components in Wicket seems more like an unnecessary increase in "ways to do it" rather than a useful increase in flexibility. 3) The tooling support issue should not be underestimated. The author of the Spindle plugin for Tapestry eventually gave up on updating it for Tapestry 4 precisely because there were so many ways in which components could be defined (in the template, in the XML spec file or in Java via annotations). While experienced Tapestry users can get along just fine without that plugin, it was a big "selling point" for new users. In short, I think you should hold a hard line against increased functionality in templates and only make exceptions for the most compelling and common use cases (e.g. wicket:message). -Ryan On Feb 13, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Jonathan Locke wrote: > > > Our Wiki describes the wicket:component tag as follows: > > "<wicket:component> - Creates a Wicket component on the fly. Needs > a class > attribute. Though this has been in wicket for a long time, it is > still kind > of an unsupported feature, as most of the core developers believe > that this > may lead to misuse of the framework. Before heavily relying on this > feature, > you might want to contact the user list to discuss alternative > strategies." > > It's unclear to me that anyone is using this. The utility is > limited and > unimportant. And for anyone creating tooling support for wicket, > this will > be a tripping point. I can't see any good reason to keep this > feature as it > is a way to instantiate a component in the markup and might server > as the > beginning of a bunch of requests to add component configuration or > other > code logic where we should only have nice clean markup. > > VOTE: > > [ ] Delete this unimportant and generally unsupported feature > [ ] Keep <wicket:component>, but define its limits, document it on > the wiki > as fully supported and commit to supporting it in the future > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/VOTE-on-wicket% > 3Acomponent-tf3221780.html#a8948008 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, > security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your > job easier. > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache > Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel? > cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > 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
