No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany until end of November, can't take off a week.
regards, Martin On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly. Are you going to be at Apache Con this year? If so we can discuss some of your ideas in person as well. Sean On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't > work. > > regards, > > Martin > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi Arash, > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :) > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff. > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO. > > > > -M > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello Mattias, > > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for > > > one of the following purposes: > > > > > > 1) selecting one item > > > 2) selecting multiple item > > > 3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart, > > > directory services, etc) > > > > > > the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is > > > under debate. > > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits: > > > > > > 1) simplifying development > > > 2) simplifying learning for users > > > 3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > Arash > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input > > > component". > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators > > > > on the tree? > > > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use > > > > case you are looking at. > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Matthias, > > > > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface. > > > > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface. > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input > > > data" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say > > > > > > "var" on those tags. > > > > > > > > > > > > UIComponent > > > > > > | > > > > > > + - UIXComponent > > > > > > | > > > > > > + - UIXComponentBase > > > > > > | > > > > > > + UIXCollection > > > > > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy > > > > > > | > > > > > > + UIXTree > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXIterator > > > > > > | > > > > > > + UIXTable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used > > > > > > by the Trin Table. > > > > > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Matthias Wessendorf > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh > > > > > > > > further stuff: > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 >
-- http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
