BTW: this does work, but is ugly:
BODY * {
cursor: pointer !important;
}
On 9/18/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That does not fully work, in Firefox at least (just tried it, the
> cursor still reverts to an I-Beam for input text boxes for example)
>
> On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's possible to set the cursor on the body node, would have to use a skin
> > property rather than a style property, but I'm not sure I like that.
> >
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm not sure a cursor will work. The cursor applies to the front-most
> > > element underneath the cursor. The only way, that I am aware of, to
> > > get a global cursor is to float (using absolute positioning and
> > > z-index) an HTML element (like a DIV) over the entire page. This is
> > > what the "blocking" functionality already does in Trinidad (I
> > > believe).
> > >
> > > So really, is it not the job of the programmer to ensure the PPR
> > > request is a blocking request and not the job of the status indicator
> > > to change the cursor?
> > >
> > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hmm I don't think this should be directly in the indicator contract. If
> > it
> > > > is, then I think it should be a new "type" attribute on the status
> > indicator
> > > > with the following values:
> > > >
> > > > "icon": render default icons (default value)
> > > > "cursor": change the cursor on document level (requires a way to
> > specified
> > > > the busy and ready cursor though)
> > > > "facets": render busy and ready facets
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > one more,
> > > > >
> > > > > what about changing the cursor, when statusIndicator is busy ?
> > > > >
> > > > > -M
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > I think
> > > > > >
> > > > > > no facet => icon is rendered;
> > > > > > otherwise, no icon is rendered.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -M
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hmm not as simple as I though. Before pushing a patch let decide
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > behavior for every use case:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Both facets are specified and rendered --> Don't render any icon
> > > > > > > Both facets are specified but only one is rendered --> ?
> > > > > > > Both facets are specified but neither are rendered --> ?
> > > > > > > Only one facet is specified and rendered --> Don't render any
> > icon or
> > > > > > > render the icon of the missing facet?
> > > > > > > Only one facet is specified but not rendered --> ?
> > > > > > > No facet is specified --> Render both icons
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ~ Simon
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Or put tr:icon in the facet. Yeah, that sound good too.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > that sounds like the best solution.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Adam Winer < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > IMO, if we have a facet, we don't render the icon. No need
> > > > > > > > > > for an attribute at all.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Anyone that desperately needs both the facet and the icon
> > > > > > > > > > can render two statusIndicators.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -- Adam
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speaking of which, I forgot to add skin documentation.
> > I'll
> > > > do
> > > > > > > that right
> > > > > > > > > > > > away.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I would also like to add a new attribute to skip the
> > icon
> > > > > > > rendering. If it
> > > > > > > > > > > > hasn't been of backward compatibility, I would have
> > simply
> > > > removed
> > > > > > > them
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I added a demo usage of the facet's, I was thinking, that
> > it
> > > > > > > shouldn't
> > > > > > > > > > > render the "default" icon,
> > > > > > > > > > > glad you pointed it out now.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > since it's easily doable with a combination of facet and
> > > > tr:icon,
> > > > > > > but since
> > > > > > > > > > > > we had a release with the statusIndicator already,
> > that's
> > > > out of
> > > > > > > question.
> > > > > > > > > > > > So, what I need now is a decent attribute name. What do
> > you
> > > > think
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > "renderIcon" or "renderFacetsOnly"?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I tend to like renderFacetsOnly, because that what you
> > added
> > > > where
> > > > > > > facets.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps, we can change that soon, that when facet's are
> > > > specified,
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > don't render the "default" icon.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Simon
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > blog:
> > > > http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog:
> > http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
