Meh, that's a lot of work for not a lot of gain.
Why don't we just move it to user.client.ui, right next to
AbstractImagePrototype? I don't see why we'd make it a nested class.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I was wondering if we should move the code from
On 2011/05/20 14:48:29, rjrjr wrote:
Meh, that's a lot of work for not a lot of gain.
Exactly, which is why I never moved it.
Why don't we just move it to user.client.ui, right next to
AbstractImagePrototype? I don't see why we'd make it a nested class.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:32 PM,
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1446807/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
It's not just a lot of work, it's the wrong thing to do. Even the
rendered image relies on the com.google.gwt.user event handling system,
at least for IE6.
How do you like it in user/client/ui?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1446807/
--
user/client/ui works for me
Thanks,
John LaBanca
jlaba...@google.com
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
It's not just a lot of work, it's the wrong thing to do. Even the
rendered image relies on the com.google.gwt.user event handling system,
at least for IE6.
How do
Bob, are you okay with this in gwt/resources/client?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1446807/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
I was wondering if we should move the code from abstract image prototype
here, make it depend on the renderer. Deferred binding and all. What do you
think?
On May 19, 2011 9:41 PM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
