myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Perkins, Nate-P63196" <Nate.Perk...@gdc4s.com>
Subject RE: svn commit: r576576 [1/3] - in /myfaces/trinidad/trunk/trinidad: trinidad-build/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven-faces-plugin/components/trinidad/core/ trinidad-impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/trinidadinternal/renderkit/core/xhtml/ trinida
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:05:23 GMT
Yes, but why pollute the page unnecessarily with an empty outputText?  

If I approach the subject from a maintainability perspective, I think
its more intuitive for the documentation to state why the icon is gone
then to have to figure out why some developer stuck an empty outputText
into a facet.

I've been watching this thread, so I hope you don't mind my 2 cents.... 


Nate Perkins
General Dynamics C4 Systems

>This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
may contain GDC4S
> confidential or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution
> is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact
the sender by reply email and
> destroy all copies of the original message.
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Winer [mailto:awiner@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 9:24 AM
To: MyFaces Development
Subject: Re: svn commit: r576576 [1/3] - in
/myfaces/trinidad/trunk/trinidad:
trinidad-build/src/main/resources/META-INF/maven-faces-plugin/components
/trinidad/core/
trinidad-impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/trinidadinternal/renderki
t/core/xhtml/ trinida

OK, five seconds more consideration, and now I'm torn.
It's easy enough to write:

  <tr:statusIndicator>
     <f:facet name="busy">Loading...</f:facet>
     <f:facet name="ready"><tr:outputText/></f:facet>
  </tr:statusIndicator>

... which would have the same effect.  So I could really
go either way.

-- Adam

On 9/19/07, Adam Winer <awiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see what you're saying...  I think I'd be OK then with a rule
> where specifying either facet gets rid of both icons.  Especially
> with a bit of doc explaining why it does that (exactly the example
> you give).
>
> -- Adam
>
>
>
> On 9/19/07, Simon Lessard <simon.lessard.3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello Adam,
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Adam Winer <awiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think it should be as simple as for each of "busy" and
> > > "ready", render the facet if it's present, the icon if it's not.
> >
> > The only issue with that behavior is most common usage. I think the
most
> > common usage with facets is going to be a "busy" facet and no
"ready" (to
> > mimic GMail behavior for example). Personally, that's the way I
would use
> > it. If that's really the most common case, then it should be "as
soon as a
> > facet is specified, rendered or not, no icon will be rendered". But,
if we
> > think the most common case is going to be with both facets, then I
agree
> > with your suggestion.
> >
> > ~ Simon
> >
> >
> > > -- Adam
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard < simon.lessard.3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hmm not as simple as I though. Before pushing a patch let decide
on the
> > > > behavior for every use case:
> > > >
> > > > Both facets are specified and rendered --> Don't render any icon
> > > > Both facets are specified but only one is rendered --> ?
> > > >  Both facets are specified but neither are rendered --> ?
> > > >  Only one facet is specified and rendered --> Don't render any
icon or
> > > > render the icon of the missing facet?
> > > > Only one facet is specified but not rendered --> ?
> > > > No facet is specified --> Render both icons
> > > >
> > > > ~ Simon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard < simon.lessard.3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Or put tr:icon in the facet. Yeah, that sound good too.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > that sounds like the best solution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9/18/07, Adam Winer < awiner@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > > > > > IMO, if we have a facet, we don't render the icon.  No
need
> > > > > > > for an attribute at all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone that desperately needs both the facet and the icon
> > > > > > > can render two statusIndicators.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -- Adam
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard < simon.lessard.3@gmail.com
>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Speaking of which, I forgot to add skin documentation.
I'll do
> > > > that right
> > > > > > > > > away.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would also like to add a new attribute to skip
the
icon
> > > > rendering. If it
> > > > > > > > > hasn't been of backward compatibility, I would
have
simply
> > removed
> > > > them
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I added a demo usage of the facet's, I was thinking,
that it
> > > > shouldn't
> > > > > > > > render the "default" icon,
> > > > > > > > glad you pointed it out now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > since it's easily doable with a combination of
facet
and
> > tr:icon,
> > > > but since
> > > > > > > > > we had a release with the statusIndicator already,
that's out
> > of
> > > > question.
> > > > > > > > > So, what I need now is a decent attribute name.
What
do you
> > think
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > "renderIcon" or "renderFacetsOnly"?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I tend to like renderFacetsOnly, because that what
you
added
> > where
> > > > facets.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Perhaps, we can change that soon, that when facet's
are
> > specified,
> > > > we
> > > > > > > > don't render the "default" icon.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ~ Simon
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message