You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by "Elankath, Tarun (Cognizant)" <ET...@blr.cognizant.com> on 2003/02/27 10:07:02 UTC
Tapestry Enhancement Request.
Hi list,
I propose a scheme where the standard components behave a bit more like the 'any' component. Example:
instead of <table><tbody><span jwcid="forEachCust"><tr>blahblah</tr></span></tbody></table>
whether we can have something like:
<table><tbody jwcid="forEachCust"><tr>blahlblah</tr></tbody></table>
The second is so much cleaner, it reduces the number of superfluous tags. This behaviour would be desirable for other components too. (It could be made optional through a formal parameter)
Ofcourse, I apologize if there is already a current way of doing this. (apart from writing a custom component)
Thanks,
Tarun
RE: Tapestry Enhancement Request.
Posted by "Howard M. Lewis Ship" <hl...@attbi.com>.
Many components already do this. Foreach and ListEdit already do exactly
this. Insert will render a <span> element if you supply any informal
parameters. Have you been reading the Component Reference?
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
http://jakarta.apache.org/proposals/tapestry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elankath, Tarun (Cognizant) [mailto:ETarun@blr.cognizant.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:07 AM
> To: tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Tapestry Enhancement Request.
>
>
> Hi list,
>
> I propose a scheme where the standard components behave a bit
> more like the 'any' component. Example: instead of
> <table><tbody><span
> jwcid="forEachCust"><tr>blahblah</tr></span></tbody></table>
>
> whether we can have something like:
> <table><tbody jwcid="forEachCust"><tr>blahlblah</tr></tbody></table>
>
> The second is so much cleaner, it reduces the number of
> superfluous tags. This behaviour would be desirable for other
> components too. (It could be made optional through a formal parameter)
>
> Ofcourse, I apologize if there is already a current way of
> doing this. (apart from writing a custom component)
>
> Thanks,
> Tarun
>
>
>