On 10/21/06, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm affraid that the hidden field would not be a very good alternative. > Wicket does redirect after post, if you are using redirect to > render/buffer, which IMHO 99,9% people do.
I don't think it matters much actually. Whether you post that information as part of the url, or as a hidden field, it all ends up in the same pile. The rules for pagemap/ pageversion etc are the same, and it is to be interpreted during target resolving. The redirect is to a rendered page, which already has the hidden field in it, like it otherwise would have the links with all the information in it. For the record, I would certainly not prefer this to be the standard mechanism for Wicket, even if it was implemented. But if people like this alternative and someone coded it, that would be fine. Eelco ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
