Thanks for reviewing the new class.

On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Michiel van der Wulp
<[email protected]> wrote:

> The notationLanguage should not be part of your new NotationSettings, since:
> - NotationSettings instances are used to communicate settings between Figs
>   and NotationProviders.
> - NotationProviders are per definition one language only.
> - the notation language we need at construction time of the notationProvider
>   (to be able to construct the right one),
> - and the settings are needed when the NP generates strings or parses
>   (and they may have been changed in the meanwhile).

Yes, I wasn't sure about whether to include notationLanguage or not.
In the end I decided that the settings object provides communication
with the notation subsystem as a whole so included it, but it's easy
enough to move back into DiagramSettings.  Anyone else have an opinion
one way or the other?

As long as I've got your (and everyone's) attention, here are some
other questions:

- Is it correct that showBidirectionalArrows (for associations) is not
a notation setting, although nominally defined with the rest of the
notation settings?  Ditto for showBoldNames?

- the current settings are a mix of singular and plural, but I think
it'd be easier for users of the API if we standardized on one or the
other.  Anyone have a preference?  I arbitrarily picked plural
(showAssociationNames), but I'd be just as happy with singular
(showAssociationName).

- similar to the above we had a mix of "show" and "hide" and I've
standardized on "show" for them all.  This makes the API more regular,
but does introduce a mismatch at the persistence interface (where the
old names are fixed for compatibility reasons).

- anyone got a better name for DiagramSettings?  I'm not thrilled with
it, but can't think of one that I like much better.

- DiagramSettings currently includes NotationSettings (by reference)
based on the logic that the first contains all settings that affect
the appearance of Figs while the second controls the subset which is
textual.  Does this seem reasonable?  (It may be more or less
mandatory the way things are structured now, but I'm going to check
and see how much flexibility there is)

It would be good to get the API for DiagramSettings/NotationSettings
as close to correct as possible before it's released, so now is the
time for everyone to provide their feedback.

Tom

------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=987665

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: 
[[email protected]].

Reply via email to