There is already a blocking panel rendered by Trinidad. Looks like this:
<div id="_pprBlockingDiv" onkeypress="return false;" onmouseup="return
false;" onmousedown="return false;" onkeyup="return false;"
onkeydown="return false;" style="position: absolute; left: 0pt; top:
0pt; width: 0pt; height: 0pt; cursor: wait;" onclick="return
_pprConsumeClick(event);"/>
Not sure if you would want a component that simply shows this or not,
I would think a public javascript API method may be a more obvious
choice?
On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another way would be a "blocking panel" component that you set in the
> statusIndicator's busy facet. Blocking panel skinning could be set to
> absolute positioning to cover the whole screen and apply transparency
> masking. Some JavaScript could also be added to it to prevent event
> bubbling. That would effectively block everything during PPR events.
>
> That being said, you still didn't give me your input on what should be
> rendered when only one facet is specified. ;P
>
>
> On 9/18/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There is no reason to change the cursor unless you want the GUI to be
> > unresponsive to clicks and key presses right? The goal of a busy
> > cursor would be to block any user input and let them know things are
> > busy. In that case this works:
> >
> > <tr:commandLink partialSubmit="true" blocking="true" />
> >
> > Then if that is indeed what is desired, then maybe what is best is to
> > have all components that have "autoSubmit" support also support
> > "blocking".
> >
> > Along with that, perhaps the ability for blocking should also be added
> > to the JavaScript call "TrPage.getInstance().sendPartialFormPost"
> >
> > I would see this as a more flexible architecture, as it leaves the
> > choice of whether or not to block user input up to each control
> > instead of making the blocking a choice of the status indicator.
> >
> > Different approaches could be (1) always block on PPR or (2) block on
> > certain types of PPR only or (3) block on the majority PPR but with
> > the occasional exception (like a poll for example).
> >
> > Just my $.02
> >
> > -Andrew
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Simon Lessard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > A way to set the cursor directly would be nice. I'm sure we're going to
> see
> > > users wanting that. Is there a way to directly set the current cursor?
> > > Dunno, some obscure JavaScript function...
> > >
> > > Also, I could use more input on the indicator behavior in case only one
> > > facet is specified and/or rendered.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/18/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > ...was just a thought ... :-)
> > > >
> > > > On 9/18/07, Andrew Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
