I like this idea. I was playing around with ways to combine the last two
parameters, but nothing looked good. This looks good to me.
-tr-rule-ref: property("background-color", "af|foo{color}")
Alan Yu wrote, On 4/8/2010 12:47 PM PT:
To make it more clear, maybe we can combine the last two parameters
into a single one like: "af|foo{color}". Also, if "{color}" is
omitted, the property name specified in parameter 1 will be pulled.
Thanks,
-Alan
On 4/8/2010 11:32 AM, Jeanne Waldman wrote:
I like Option 3 as well. It's still fairly short, and it uses a
convention we already have. It is a little unclear which parameter
you are setting (background-color in this example) and which you are
pulling from the selector (color).
Alan Yu wrote, On 4/5/2010 2:31 PM PT:
Hi Jeanne,
I didn't know we have a third option to consider: -tr-rule-ref:
property("background-color", "af|foo", "color").
I'd vote for option #3 for the following reasons:
1. The syntax is consistent with -tr-rule-ref:selector(...).
2. It is intuitive if you're already familiar with
"-tr-rule-ref:selector(...)".
3. Option #2 can be confusing to the user since the keyword
"-tr-rule-ref" can be used both as a property name and a value.
4. From DT's perspective, it's easier to support since we only need
to provide another possible value (property(...), vs. selector(...)
to "-tr-rule-ref") to help with user's selection in the PI.
Thanks,
-Alan
On 4/5/2010 1:56 PM, Jeanne Waldman wrote:
you can remove the Fwd, and reply-to d...@myfaces.apache.org.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Trinidad][Skinning][API] Include property in CSS API
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:04:23 -0700
From: Jeanne Waldman <jeanne.wald...@oracle.com>
Reply-To: MyFaces Development <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
To: MyFaces Development <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
References:
<n2z16f5365c1004020028l81278c5fv9b834da89c013...@mail.gmail.com>
We don't have a -tr-include-style. We have a -tr-rule-ref:selector.
So if we did #1, I would go for -tr-rule-ref:property instead of
-tr-include-property.
1': -tr-rule-ref:property(selector="af|foo",propertyName="color",
localPropertyName="background-color")
3. -tr-rule-ref: property("background-color", "af|foo", "color");
// or
something like this to make it shorter.
Right now I'm leaning towards 2.
2':
background-color: -tr-rule-ref:property("af|foo", "color");
Marius Petoi wrote, On 4/2/2010 12:28 AM PT:
Hello,
Maybe you followed the discussions on this topic from
http://markmail.org/search/?q=skinning#query:skinning%20order%3Adate-backward+page:1+mid:4nt2ykmdnnmcyvp4+state:results
We need to decide between two alternatives for the syntax of the
"-tr-include-property". The two alternatives are:
1. -tr-include-property:
property(selector="af|foo",propertyName="color",
localPropertyName="background-color")
2. background-color : -tr-property-ref("af|foo", "color")
The advantage of the first API is that it is quite similar to the
"-tr-include-style", while for the second one that the local
property name can't be mistaken with the included property.
What do you think? Which is the best alternative?
Regards,
Marius
