Would it not be similarely logical to rename the "CompartmentFigText" to "EditableCompartmentFigText"? Since all its children use the NotationProvider, and the other offspring of FigSingleLineText does not.
I always though FigSingleLineText would be the owner of the NotationProvider. If my understanding is correct we need a notation provider even if the Fig is not editable in order to generate its display. Not all FigTexts that require notation are within a compartment. For example all the text annotations of edges should be FigSingleLineText. I was actually hoping long term we would eventually be able to get rid of CompartmentFigText. I don't think it's a very good pattern that a Fig should have knowledge of the Fig it's contained within. So I'd prefer responsibility stayed in FigSingleLineText.
There is still a lot of work to do with Notation, to make the compartments listen to model changes, instead of their containers. See e.g. the TODO note in modelChanged() of FigClass & FigClassifierBox.
I wouldn't have thought it the responsibility of the notation subsystem to update the compartments themselves. Only the text figs within those compartments. ie FigOperationsCompartment should be listening for add/remove events of operations on the owner and creating or removing its internal FigTexts based on those events. This should always happen and is not notation dependent.
And how did I come to this: The diagram is not updated if you change the name of a stereotype of an attribute or operation (or reception).
But yes, the FigOperation should be listening to changes to its stereotypes and the notation subsystem should control that. Bob. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
