On 9/18/14 10:47 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> BTW, I was thinking about this some moreŠ
>>
>> I haven't looked at your code, but are GraphicShapes actually allowed to
>> be children of any container? Or do they have to be children of a
>> GraphicsContainer? If the latter, then they shouldn't implement IUIBase
>> and the developer may have to first place a GraphicsContainer in the DOM
>> to contain them.
>>
>>
>The plan is to support both. GraphicShape is the base class for
>individual
>shapes like Rect, Ellipse, etc. It is also the base class for
>GraphicsContainer which exposes methods like drawRect, drawEllipse, etc.
>In the former case, Rects can be directly added to a container. In the
>latter case, GraphicsContainer can be added to a container.
I guess I was expecting that you could declaratively describe a complex
graphic and do something like:
<GraphicsContainer>
<Rect ..>
<Circle ..>
<Path ..>
</GraphicsContainer>
I would then think the child Rect, Circle and Path shouldn't be heavy.
But I also see the need to have a single shape as a child of a container
and mixed in with other components.
What about doing something similar to Spark? Spark has a BitmapImage
graphic primitive and an Image component. FlexJS could have a Rect
component as well as a Rect graphic element that only can be a child of a
GraphicsContainer. The Rect component can just be a UIBase that is
composed of a GraphicsContainer child with a Rect in it. That would be
consistent with the composition philosophy of FlexJS: common patterns get
composited into Components and can be further optimized if needed.
Thoughts?
-Alex
