On Jul 9, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Sarah Allen wrote:

> Hey Jim,
>
> Did you ever make this fix?  I'm finally using this syntax and took  
> a look at the docs (trunk about a week ago), unchanged from the 3.3  
> reference page:
> http://localhost:8080/video/docs/reference/handler.html
>
Yes, I did, a long time ago. It should be solid against the spec:

http://wiki.openlaszlo.org/Event_and_handler_tags

John's spent some time converting examples, but I don't know if he's  
written anything in the DevGuide about the new syntax. John?

> It looks like methodName is still called method, which I find a bit  
> confusing.  Will this be fixed for 3.4?
>
Do you mean the <handler> attribute is still called @name? I found  
that confusing as well, but I've gotten used to it and besides it's  
what we agreed to in the proposal.
> There's also no description of what "method" does so I would guess  
> it is safe to change to it.  It would be hard to figure out how to  
> use that syntax from the reference as is.  Also, the description of  
> name seems to be inherited from node, which is not particularly  
> helpful.
>
@method is used to point a handler at a method you have separately  
declared. It's useful if you want to call the method directly:

        <handler name="onmyevent" method="handlemyevent"/>
        <method name="handlemyevent">
          ...
        </method>

Perhaps a bug or two filed against the RefGuide would be in order?

Thanks,

jim

> Thanks,
> Sarah
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at  8:47 PM, Jim Grandy wrote:
>
>
> No worries, I'm pretty bad at reading them!
>
> thanks,
>
>
> jim
>
> On Jan 12, 2006, at 6:23 PM, Henry Minsky wrote:
>
> I'm terrible at writing .rnc schemas...
>
> I'll send you the test cases I was using as soon as I can find them.
>
>
> On 1/12/06, Jim Grandy wrote: I'm converting the base components to  
> use <event> and <handler>, and ran into something I don't think is  
> quite right.
>
> The proposal ( http://wiki.openlaszlo.org/Event_and_handler_tags)  
> suggests that <handler> should have two forms: <http:// 
> wiki.openlaszlo.org/Event_and_handler_tags>
>
> <http://wiki.openlaszlo.org/Event_and_handler_tags>
> <handler name="eventName" [reference="..."] [args="..."]>
>    ...
>   </handler>
>
> and
>
>
> <handler name="eventName" [reference="..."] method="methodName" />
>
> But the schema entry looks like this:
>
>
> handler =
>   element handler {
>    ( nameAttribute |
>    ( nameAttribute? &
>      ## The name of the method that this handler will call
>      attribute method {string} &
>      ## If this attribute is present, it is a JavaScript expression
>      ## that evaluates to an object.  The code in this method executes
>      ## when this object sends the event named by the @a{event}
>      ## attribute.  This attribute may be present only if
>      ## the @a{event} attribute is present too.
>      [a:defaultValue="this"]
>      attribute reference {reference}?)) &
>     ## The parameter names of this method.  The value of this  
> attribute
>     ## is a comma-separated list of JavaScript identifiers.
>     [a:defaultValue=""
>      lza:modifiers="final"]
>     attribute args {string}? &
>     text
>   }
>
>
>
> I read this as allowing
>
>
> <handler name="eventName" [args="..."]> ... </handler>
>
>
> or
>
>
> <handler [name="eventName"] method="methodName" [reference="..."]  
> [args="..."]> ... </handler>
>
>
> Whether text is allowed or not (it shouldn't if @method is given)  
> is one problem. Another is that I can't write
>
>
> <handler name="eventName" reference="..." args="..."> ... </handler>
>
>
> The workaround for the second is (I think) to split the handler  
> definition into a handler and a method, but I shouldn't have to do  
> this.
>
>
> Third, the comment says about @method that "this attribute may be  
> present only if the @a{event} attribute is present too," but  
> there's no @event attribute in handler. Does this mean to say @name  
> instead of @event?
>
>
> If everyone agrees, I'll propose a change to the schema to fix both  
> of these problems. I don't see a unit test file; Henry, did you  
> write one when you did the initial implementation?
>
>
> jim
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laszlo-dev mailing list
> [email protected] <javascript:lzSetCanvasAttribute 
> ('js_mailto', '[email protected]')>
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Henry Minsky
> Software Architect
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:lzSetCanvasAttribute 
> ('js_mailto', '[EMAIL PROTECTED]')>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laszlo-dev mailing list
> [email protected] <javascript:lzSetCanvasAttribute 
> ('js_mailto', '[email protected]')>    
> <javascript:lzSetCanvasAttribute('js_mailto', 'Laszlo- 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]')>
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev  <http:// 
> www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev>
>

_______________________________________________
Laszlo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev

Reply via email to