Is there any feature set available for the "new" treetable?
/Regards Mats On 6/10/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, exactly. That's what I want. -Matej On 6/10/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So for the tree and treetable nothing changes with respect to wicket > 1.2? Both are in extensions, and a new tree replaces the old, pre ajax > tree? > > Martijn > > On 6/10/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it is much better. > > > > As for the TreeTable: The new TreeTable that I plan (without those > > neat lines but also without layout problems) is not alive yet. And the > > one that we already have should be moved back to extensions. I don't > > think we need (nor should have) TreeTable in core. > > > > -Matej > > > > On 6/10/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if it is really better then do it now before we put out rcs. also what > > > happens to treetable? that should prob also move to extensions? > > > > > > -igor > > > > > > > > > On 6/10/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > I hope this e-mail won't upset anyone too much. > > > > > > > > Let me summarize our tree components situation first. > > > > > > > > We have Tree and TreeTable components in core, and another Tree > > > > component in extensions. > > > > > > > > The Tree from extensions is the oldest one, without Ajax support. > > > > The Tree in core (as well as TreeTable) supports Ajax, but > > > > unfortunately suffers from layout problems and layout limitations, > > > > such as fixed line height, no way to wrap tree text or no way to add > > > > horizontal scrolling. Also the Tree is a bit difficult to customize. > > > > > > > > Fortunately, the base class that encapsulates the hard work (tree > > > > logic), AbstractTree, is pretty much presentation agnostic and it's > > > > not a big problem to build another component on it which would solve > > > > those layout problems. > > > > > > > > In fact, I've already such component done. It supports variable > > > > heights, content wrapping and horizontal scrolling. But the question > > > > is, where (and maybe even if) should we put it? > > > > > > > > The solution I want to propose may sound a bit radical. So I expected > > > > people want to yell on me and/or want kick my ball. > > > > > > > > Yet I'd like to > > > > > > > > a) remove the old (kinda unsupported) tree from extensions (is > > > > anyone even use it?) > > > > b) move the current Tree and TreeTable* from core to extensions > > > > (sight, i know we moved it into core just recently) > > > > c) move the new Tree into core. > > > > > > > > * I don't think it's a good idea to have a TreeTable in core anyway. > > > > We don't have DataTable in core and I'm pretty sure much more people > > > > are using DataTable then TreeTable. > > > > > > > > So... I know it's kinda late for things like this. But i was way too > > > > busy to do this sooner. Sorry. > > > > > > > > -Matej > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket > Wicket 1.2.6 contains a very important fix. Download Wicket now! > http://wicketframework.org >
