Hmm. I don't have any problem with using the "icon.up" in the MXML skin.
I'm thinking of the occasion in the example.
We could still declare the states property changes generated code as part
of the document except when we set a skin state we set the component
instance.currentState instead of currentState.
Doesn't UIComponent have a states property? We could assign the state's
values when we assign the skin. The skin has a list of its states correct?
Sorry on mobile.
We could have a different syntax for it:
icon:up="upImage.png"
icon::up="upImage.png"
icon@up="upImage.png"
icon#up="upImage.png"
Not sure if these examples will show up. the problem with the first two is
that a colon + any character turns into emoticons. So posting examples
online and chat might get translated.
I'll have to look at the code but when we have CSS that uses pseudo states
we use that same code when we encounter inline MXML pseudo state
syntax,"icon#up".
On Saturday, March 7, 2015, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Interesting. I get why you would want that.
>
> States are declared as part of the document. So “icon.about” tells the
> compiler to set the icon when the MXML file changes currentState to
> “about”. The Button skin, if it were defined in MXML, would have the “up”
> state, not necessarily the MXML file that contains the Button. The
> generated code in the containing MXML doesn’t know anything about Button’s
> skin’s states since even the skin itself can be assigned at runtime or via
> CSS. Feels a bit like piercing an abstraction boundary, but I get that
> CSS lets you do it. Does it feel too unnatural to have to use icon.up in
> the Button’s skin?
>
> -Alex
>
> On 3/7/15, 9:34 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> >This sounds like a fantastic idea. It would be a bonus if we could get
> >the
> >same state names auto-complete feature to work in CSS as well.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >On Mar 7, 2015 8:08 PM, "jude" <flexcapaci...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> In CSS you can address certain states of a component using pseudo states
> >> (states) like so:
> >>
> >> s|Button#iconOnlyButton:up {
> >> icon: "assets/upImage.png";
> >> }
> >> s|Button#iconOnlyButton:over {
> >> icon: "assets/overImage.png";
> >> }
> >> s|Button#iconOnlyButton:down {
> >> icon: "assets/downImage.png";
> >> }
> >>
> >> But you can't do the same thing in MXML.
> >>
> >> You *can* address document level states in MXML like so:
> >>
> >> <s:Button icon="default.png" icon.about="about.png"/>
> >>
> >> <s:states>
> >> <s:State name="home" />
> >> <s:State name="gallery" />
> >> <s:State name="feedback" />
> >> </s:states>
> >>
> >> But that doesn't let you assign values to states of the component. This
> >> will throw an error:
> >>
> >> <s:Button icon="default.png" icon.up="about.png"/>
> >>
> >> While this CSS will not:
> >>
> >> s|Button#iconOnlyButton:up {
> >> icon: "about.png";
> >> }
> >>
> >> Is it possible to add support for inline pseudo states like we do with
> >>CSS?
> >> Does anyone else want this? How would we do it?
> >>
> >> Jude
> >>
>
>
