IMO, if we have a facet, we don't render the icon. No need for an attribute at all.
Anyone that desperately needs both the facet and the icon can render two statusIndicators. -- Adam On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Speaking of which, I forgot to add skin documentation. I'll do that right > > away. > > > > I would also like to add a new attribute to skip the icon rendering. If it > > hasn't been of backward compatibility, I would have simply removed them > > I added a demo usage of the facet's, I was thinking, that it shouldn't > render the "default" icon, > glad you pointed it out now. > > > since it's easily doable with a combination of facet and tr:icon, but since > > we had a release with the statusIndicator already, that's out of question. > > So, what I need now is a decent attribute name. What do you think of > > "renderIcon" or "renderFacetsOnly"? > > I tend to like renderFacetsOnly, because that what you added where facets. > > Perhaps, we can change that soon, that when facet's are specified, we > don't render the "default" icon. > > -Matthias > > > > > ~ Simon > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > further stuff: > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org >
