May not work (or may just be plain stupid), but couldn't people use tabIndex as normal, except Trinidad components would multiply the value by 10 to make space for multi-tabstop components. Doesn't handle includes/regions though!
On 8/3/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One gripe with tabindex has been its complete lack of relative indices. And it raises a bunch of questions once you have components with more than one tabstop. Take inputDate; it has both a field and a button to show the dialog. Or table, which ends up having several. Basically, tabindex half solves the problem, but creates a ton of new problems. I don't like implementing half solutions... Does someone have a good proposal for a tabindex solution that addresses those issues? -- Adam On 8/3/06, Benj Fayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For our purposes html tabindex is exactly what we want. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:16 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: tabIndex - Solution? > > I've seen comments on the Oracle forums about it not being a nice > solution > and thus ignored, but nothing further about how to achive this. > > On 8/3/06, Benj Fayle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I was just about to make a post regarding tabindex myself. I would > > really like to see this supported as a pass through attribute as well. > > From my viewpoint that is the simplest mechanism. > > > > Is there a reason this hasn't been implemented in the past? > > > > Benj Fayle > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dan Robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:12 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: tabIndex - Solution? > > > > Guys, > > > > Looking through the components, I see we don't pass-though 'tabIndex'. > > I > > know it's a little flawed in its design (no relative values etc.), but > > we're > > wondering how to best control this without having such an attribute. > > > > Do we just live with the default behaviour, or could we find a better > > solution? > > > > Thanks, > > > > D. > > > > -- > > Chordiant Software Inc. > > www.chordiant.com > > > > > > -- > Chordiant Software Inc. > www.chordiant.com >
-- Chordiant Software Inc. www.chordiant.com
