There is also the future possibility of displaying multiple diagrams
by an MDI interface or multiple tabs with a diagram on each (ie there
could be multiple instances of TabDiagram).

What is the concept of the 'active' diagram in that case? A TabDiagram
should contain a diagram, I think the term active is meaningless
though and possibly misleading.

I agree that it's certainly shouldn't be part of the project

Bob.


2009/1/18 Michiel van der Wulp <[email protected]>:
> This discussion was started in issue 5597, but does not belong there.
>
> Michiel said:
> -------------
> Anyhow, the current active diagram is currently managed by the
> ProjectImpl, in the ActiveDiagram member.
> Its getter and setter are deprecated, but they should not be.
>
> Currently, every project has exactly one active diagram.
> An alternative architecture would be that every ProjectBrowser has one
> active diagram... that would even be better, in the future case that
> every Project may have multiple ProjectBrowsers.
>
>
> Tom said:
> ---------
> ..., TabDiagram (not ProjectBrowser) should concern itself with
> windows containing diagrams, including which windows are open, which one
> is active, etc.  Projects should know what diagrams they contain and
> have no concept of what windows/diagrams are "active" (which is entirely
> a GUI concept).
>  Editing commands need to derive the correct diagram/project from the
> window that is being operated on, but the resulting action/command
> should be entirely self-describing and completely independent of any
> concept of active project/diagram/window.  It should be possible to have
> multiple open projects, multiple open diagrams and even multiple open
> windows for a given diagram.  With the correct architecture, this is
> trivial.  With the current design, it's impossible.
>
>
> Michiel:
> --------
> Agreed, I did not think that far through yet.
> One small remark: If the TabDiagram maintains the notion of the active
> diagram, then the Presentation Tab depends on it, since it only works on
> Figs on the current diagram.
> I do not know how that would fit in.
> Anyhow, it is a bit early to deprecate functions that have no
> replacement (architecture) yet.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Michiel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=1033267
>
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: 
> [[email protected]].
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=1033279

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: 
[[email protected]].

Reply via email to