flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: FlexJS MXML ids and classNames
Date Sun, 21 May 2017 15:27:58 GMT
I don’t really what we call this, but I think the following is important:

I would like an option for the following:
1. Ability to set an id in mxml-only
2. Ability set HTML ids
3. Have the compiler check that HTML ids are not used more than once.

> On May 21, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
> On 5/21/17, 1:38 AM, "yishayw" <yishayjobs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I like the idea. Sencha follows a similar pattern as far as I remember. I
>> don't like mxmlID. Everything in MXML is MXML. I would go with 'localId',
>> for the one that doesn't translate to HTML, and 'id' for the one that
>> does.
>> Also, there's nothing preventing an AS3 class from accessing the so called
>> 'mxmlID'.
> I don't care too much what we call this property, but I cannot think of a
> scenario where someone would write 'mxmlID' from an AS3 class.  Instead, I
> think you will always access the referenced object by its assigned name.
> IOW:
>    ---- Foo.mxml ----	
>    <SomeBaseClass>
>        <SomeClass mxmlID="bar" someProperty="baz" />
>    </SomeBaseClass>
> Means that you will write "bar.someProperty".  In fact, it might be
> possible for "mxmlID" or "localID" to be a pseudo-property and not
> actually a property on the object.  We already do this for "includeIn" and
> "excludeFrom" in states.  These properties are truly MXML-only and not
> ever set on the object.
> If we want to be more descriptive, we could call it "documentID" or even
> "documentVariableName" or "mxmlDocumentVariableName" which is actually
> what it does.
> Thoughts?
> -Alex

View raw message