Thanks Adam, I realized that after sending this initial email, and now I
have no need to get all the icons because I plan to go a different route
to getting the icons to the client, so I am not planning to implement
this api now.
- Jeanne
Adam Winer wrote:
getIcons() makes sense. But getContent() - it'd be sufficient to
clone the current ResponseWriter with a StringWriter, and get the
contents that way.
-- Adam
On 9/6/06, Jeanne Waldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually, my question is, I need a new method on the Skin class,
getIcons().
And in the Icon class, I need a new method, getContent().
This is for our client-side rendering, where we need to pass icon
information to the client.
I need to get all icons that are on the skin, and get the content (<img
src...> or TextIcon info)
to send to the client.
Also, I'm playing with the idea of generating the <img> markup in a way
so that
the stuff the renderer specifies goes on a <span> and the stuff that
comes from the
skinning definition goes on the <img>. This way we have a cleaner
separation of what
came from the skin and what properties are from the skin's icon
definition.
This will come in useful for our client-side rendering, as well. We'd
only need to
pass the icon markup that came from the skin to the client.
Thoughts on this one?
(I'll probably need to add a getProperties() api as well, but one step
at a time)
Thanks!
- Jeanne
Simon Lessard wrote:
> I will be all for a new Skin API, let make it an independant module!
>
> On 9/6/06, Jeanne Waldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I can see your point about ending with 'icon' being confusing, but I
>> prefer to leave this
>> alone for now.
>>
>> I'll go ahead and add support for the :hover/etc on the icon skinning
>> keys.
>>
>> (I have another issue that goes with this one (new Skin api), but
I'll
>> start a new thread)
>>
>> - Jeanne
