Hi *, yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the first thing I'm looking at.
I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do - UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much sense for a dynamic tree. What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the UIXCollection interface? regards, Martin On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi M- On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi *, > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could > have a discussion about some of the concepts. > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes. > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot > more with the values of the tree as well. I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by UIXTable. I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2 should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base) > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on (editable)valueHolders to me... (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...) > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute > are generally quite different). I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of (edit.)value:_holders > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and > then render the nodes on the client dynamically. you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render on the client side? -Matthias > > Thoughts? > > regards, > > Martin > > -- > > http://www.irian.at > > Your JSF powerhouse - > JSF Consulting, Development and > Courses in English and German > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > -- Matthias Wessendorf http://tinyurl.com/fmywh further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
