Thanks Steve. I'll give it a review shortly.

On 12/8/05, Steve Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info Carlin.  I have checked in the doc, please review.
>
> -steveh.
>
> On 12/8/05, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Great, thanks for helping with this Steve. The people interested in
> > implementing a TreeRenderer want to change the white space like the
> > "&nbsp;"
> > entities, space characters, and line breaks used as formatting of the
> HTML
> > markup of our tree node. It's just some added control of how the
> anchors,
> > images, and text that make up a node are displayed in a browser. The dev
> > would extend our TreeRenderer and override some simple methods that
> write
> > out a prefix or suffix of formatting around a given HTML element in the
> > node
> > markup.
> >
> > Here's a simple example. It overrides the method
> > renderConnectionImageSuffix() so that a new line is not added after the
> > <img> element for the connetcting expand/collapse image and
> > renderSelectionLinkPrefix() so that no white space indentation is used
> > before the anchor used to select a node. Also,
> > renderItemIconPrefix()/Suffix
> > routines to wrap a span arround the <img> element for the node icon. A
> > span
> > might be used to incorporate CSS or a call to a JavaScript routine.
> >
> > A dev could do more complex work such as overriding the
> > renderIndentation()
> > method to change the markup for the images that create the leading
> > indentation for the given node. But, I think for now we should keep it
> > simple.
> >
> > Let me know if you want something different.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Carlin
> >
> > /*
> > * Copyright 2005 The Apache Software Foundation.
> > *
> > * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> > * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> > * You may obtain a copy of the License at
> > *
> > *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > *
> > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> > * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> > * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
> implied.
> > * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> > * limitations under the License.
> > *
> > * $Header:$
> > */
> > package mytree.renderer;
> >
> > import org.apache.beehive.netui.tags.rendering.AbstractRenderAppender;
> > import org.apache.beehive.netui.tags.tree.TreeElement;
> > import org.apache.beehive.netui.tags.tree.TreeRenderer;
> >
> > public class TestTreeRenderer extends TreeRenderer
> > {
> >     protected void renderConnectionImageSuffix(AbstractRenderAppender
> > writer,
> >                                                TreeElement node)
> >     {
> >     }
> >
> >     protected void renderSelectionLinkPrefix(AbstractRenderAppender
> > writer,
> >                                              TreeElement node)
> >     {
> >     }
> >
> >     protected void renderItemIconPrefix(AbstractRenderAppender writer,
> >                                         TreeElement node)
> >     {
> >         writer.append("<span ID=\"myItemIcon\"
> > style=\"cursor:pointer;\"");
> >         writer.append(" onClick=\"doSomething()\">");
> >     }
> >
> >     protected void renderItemIconSuffix(AbstractRenderAppender writer,
> >                                         TreeElement node)
> >     {
> >         writer.append("</span>");
> >     }
> > }
> >
> > On 12/8/05, Steve Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sounds like a good doc plan for the custom TreeRenderer, I will try to
> > get
> > > the doc in today.
> > >
> > > Carlin, could you send me a sample TreeRenderer impl class, if you
> have
> > > one
> > > lying around?
> > >
> > > On 12/7/05, Carlin Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Steve,
> > > >
> > > > Here's an item I've thought of for your earlier query about doc
> needs.
> > I
> > > > think you already have this on your list. We now allow users to
> > > configure
> > > > a
> > > > custom TreeRenderer implementation (beehive-974). The way to
> configure
> > a
> > > > custom implementation of the TreeRenderer is through the beehive
> netui
> > > > config file. I put a note in the Javadoc at the top of the
> > TreeRenderer
> > > > class but for some new additional doc we could...
> > > >
> > > > - Comment on the ability to implement your own TreeRenderer by
> > extending
> > > > out
> > > > implementation and overriding any of the formatting methods desired
> > and
> > > > state how to configure NetUI. Maybe this would go in the
> > > tagsTree.htmlpage,
> > > > just following the "TreeElement Rendered Contents" section which
> > > describes
> > > > the markup used to render a node. I'm open to suggestions.
> > > >
> > > > - add information about the new <tree-renderer-class> element (in
> the
> > > > <jsp-tag-config> section) to the beehive-netui-config document.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Carlin
> > > >
> > > > On 12/1/05, Eddie O'Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Steve--
> > > > >
> > > > >   Personally, I think that the Controls Tutorial will be more
> > > > > descriptive if it focuses solely on the end-to-end process of
> > writing
> > > > > a Control.  For example:
> > > > >
> > > > > - authoring the Control's source artifacts
> > > > > - building the Control
> > > > > - packaging the Control into a JAR file
> > > > > - authoring a JUnit test for the Control
> > > > > - testing the Control
> > > > >
> > > > > Today, most of the Controls Tutorial is about how to setup, build,
> > and
> > > > > deploy a NetUI-enabled web application.  While we should certainly
> > > > > have examples and documentation about how to use a Control from a
> > Page
> > > > > Flow, it's probably more interesting to focus on the end-to-end
> > cycle
> > > > > of building a Control JAR file.
> > > > >
> > > > >   Note, this requires that I (finally!) commit the JUnit test
> > > > > container for Controls.  Believe it or not, I've got that "svn
> > add"ed
> > > > > locally and should have that done soon.  Then, it's just a matter
> of
> > > > > rewriting the tutorial.
> > > > >
> > > > >   Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > Eddie
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/30/05, Steve Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Eddie and all:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Eddie, yesterday you mentioned to me privately that you'd like
> to
> > > see
> > > > > the
> > > > > > control tutorial not use a page flow as its
> > > > > testing  environment.  Instead,
> > > > > > the page flow should be replaced with some sort of unit testing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Could you say more about what you are looking for here?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > steveh.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/29/05, Steve Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Seems like a good time to clean up and amend the 1.x docs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So here is a general call out for doc needs and wish lists for
> > > > Beehive
> > > > > 1.x
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are there any big, glaring problems with the current doc?
> > > > > > > Any little issues that have fallen through the cracks?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please respond with what you would like to see in the Beehive
> > > > 1.xdocs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > > Steve Hanson
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to