We don't want to expose the html, that is for sure. So using block for
divs and cell for tds should be out.
I was just saying that the skin selector keys we use in Trinidad use
cell or content, but not block, so even though we weren't as consistent
as we should have been, let's not add to the inconsistency by adding a
new term. :)
Pavitra Subramaniam wrote:
Yes it does. That's why I used -block everywhere and some other places -content. But Jeanne seems to recommend cell, so not sure. <!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
- Pavitra
From: Simon Lessard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 2:00 PM To: adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TrainRenderer using the new train selectors Ah, don't that expose the markup though? ~ Simon On 8/29/06, Pavitra Subramaniam <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I am using block to indicate style class that goes in a <div> and technically I should use cell for style class that goes in a <td> - Pavitra > -----Original Message----- > From: Simon Lessard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:18 AM > To: adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: TrainRenderer using the new train selectors > > Oups, comments below > > On 8/29/06, Jeanne Waldman < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > one question below > > > > Simon Lessard wrote: > > > > > Hello Pavitra, > > > > > > I had to do about the same changes on my side. Here's my list of > > selector > > > and the rules I used: > > > > > > - af|train::stop combinable with :selected, :disabled, :completed > > > (will probably become p_AFVisited) and :unvisited. You can append > > > :readOnly at the end of the result. So > > > af|train::stop:unvisited:readOnly is valid > > > - af|train::link > > > - af|train::join combinable with :disabled, :completed, > :unvisited > > > and :outer (:outer is used to add joins outside the edge of the > > > train. I don't think many will use it, but it cost > nothing and add > > > more customization > > > possibilities) > > > > Is :outer a state? It sounds to me like it should be > > af|train::join-outer > > > yes, it could be ::join-outer, was made a state only to fit > the other join selectors, but it does make more sense to use > -outer for that one. > > > Does that make more sense now? > > > Regards, > > ~ Simon > > > - af|train::overflow-start combinable with :disabled and :readOnly > > > - af|train::overflow-end combinable with :disabled, > :unvisited and > > > :readOnly > > > > > > I have the following valid suffixes: (I could not use > ::content for > > > example since double :: is now prevented from Adam's change to > > > prevent some strange behavior it seem) > > > > I don't think two pseudo-elements make sense, does it? I > suppose you > > could have a piece of a piece. Adam prevented it because there were > > bugs in it. I can't recall what the bugs were. > > > I was seeing them more as sub-elements, like ::stop::content > (content of the > stop) > > > -content(for example, the following is valid: > af|train::stop-content > > > and > > > af|train::stop:selected-content. This selector refers to the link > > > af|cell > > fo > > > the train) > > > > What does a :selected-content 'state' mean? > > How is it different than af|train::stop-content:selected? > > > My bad there, af|train::stop-content:selected is actually > what I use. Even if a better selector would have been > af|train::stop:selected::content imho. > > > -icon-block (as above but refers to the icon cell) > > > > Could you say -icon-cell? We use 'cell' quite a bit in our skinning > > selectors. > > > Yes I could, I was using block only because it was in Pavitra > document at first. > > > > > > The icons follow the same rule. > > > > > > On 8/28/06, Pavitra Subramaniam > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Hello Simon, > > >> > > >> I have also almost completed implementing the > TrainRenderer using > > >> the new skin selectors. It's great to know you are done > as well. If > > >> you plan to check in the train renderer code anytime > soon, can we > > >> agree on the common list of skin selectors, so that I can reuse > > >> them for my work internally at Oracle? I had to make the > following > > >> changes and wanted to give you an update. > > >> > > >> 1. I had to introduce a new state called "read-only". This is > > >> different from "disabled" state, like I explained in a > previous email. > > >> > > >> 2. I removed some redundant skin hooks - I can send you > the updated > > list > > >> of selectors I am using. I also couldn't get the > "pass-through states" > > >> :visited, :active and :unvisited to work, just as you. So I have > > >> temporarily defined selectors like Jeanne suggested (using > > >> p_AFVisited, p_AFUnvisited etc. and renamed :active to > :selected). > > >> > > >> 3. Finally I have simplified the rules for determining > the state of > > >> joins. > > >> I figured it would be much simpler if we did the following. The > > >> join to the left of a stop, is 'always in the same state as the > > >> stop' (Overflows could also follow the same rules as > stops). So for > > >> instance for a train like > > >> > > >> V ----- VR ----- UV ----- A ----- D ----- UVR ----- V > > >> vr uv v duvrv > > >> > > >> > > >> NOTE: The only exception, is the join to the left of an > active stop > > >> is visited. Also, UVR and VR are stops that are in 2 states > > >> simulataneously - 'visited & read-only' and 'unvisited & > > >> read-only'. Read-only implies > > the > > >> stop cannot be reached (and hence not clickable) and is > dictated by > > >> the 'readOnly' property on the component commandNavigationItem. > > >> > > >> Please let me know if the above is ok. > > >> > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> - Pavitra > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Simon Lessard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 11:43 AM > > >> > To: adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> > Subject: Re: Train selectors > > >> > > > >> > Hmmm you mean somthing like af|train:: stop.p_AFVisited? > > >> > > > >> > On 8/28/06, Jeanne Waldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > I was thinking :selected for :active. :selected > could be used > > >> > > for other components, too. > > >> > > For :visited/:unvisited, I can't think of a better name. > > >> > I'm thinking > > >> > > that we should use .p_AFVisited, .P_AFUnvisited > until we have > > >> > > the pseudo-classsupport in. These wouldn't in a public api > > >> > format, though. > > >> > > > > >> > > - Jeanne > > >> > > > > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > >Hello, > > >> > > > > > >> > > >I thought about the following name changes for the > selectors: > > >> > > > > > >> > > >:active --> :current or :selected :visited/:unvisited --> > > >> > > >:completed/:uncompleted or :seen/:unseen > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Do you have any other idea/preference? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Regards, > > >> > > > > > >> > > >~ Simon > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >"Simon Lessard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >2006-08-25 22:49 > > >> > > >Please respond to adffaces-dev > > >> > > > > > >> > > >To: "Trinidad - Dev" > > >> > < adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org> > > >> > > >cc: > > >> > > >Subject:Train selectors > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Yes... again... > > >> > > > > > >> > > >I made a new renderer and it work quite well, but I > had to use > > >> > > >:ora-visited and :ora-active for some selectors > because those > > >> > > >are "pass through" > > >> > > >values. > > >> > > >Anyone have better name suggestion while we implement state > > >> > > >interception on a per component basis? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >Regards, > > >> > > > > > >> > > >~ Simon > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
