[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMAHAWK-244?page=comments#action_12416902 ]
sean schofield commented on TOMAHAWK-244: ----------------------------------------- I'm a little confused here. The whole point of TreeWalker was that you would not have to rely on the default 0, 0:0 ,etc. naming scheme. I would agree with you that such a restriction would be a problem with dynamic trrees. Can you explain why you can't just implement your own TreeWalker with whatever naming scheme you choose? I haven't yet actually created my own dynamic tree so its possible I am missing something. > Tree2 does not use node IDs in expanding and collapsing > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TOMAHAWK-244 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMAHAWK-244 > Project: MyFaces Tomahawk > Type: Bug > Components: Tree2 > Versions: 1.1.2-SNAPSHOT, 1.1.1, 1.1.0 > Reporter: Andrew Robinson > Assignee: sean schofield > Priority: Critical > > The tree2 implementation in 1.1.1 and SVN current assumes node IDs are based > on the index of the nodes and the hierarchy of the nodes. > Example: > A (0) > B (0:0) > C (0:1) > D (0:1:0) > Where the string in parenthesis represents what tree2 assumes the node ID is. > If tree nodes have custom IDs that are unique to the tree (in this example, > A, B, C, D could actually be the node IDs), the nodes will never be expanded > or collapsed if the TreeState methods are used using the true node IDs. > In the above example, "0:1" would be considered expanded, but "C" would not > be considered expanded. > This severly limits the developer of custom tree nodes and custom tree > models. > Requested fix: > Expanded/collapsed node IDs should use the "TreeNode.getNodeId()" function. > Each node should have a unique ID for the entire tree. This ID is NOT > dependant on the parent's node ID. The TreeWalker in SVN current (1.1.3 code) > and the HtmlTreeRenderer in 1.1.1 should not use the index of the node as the > identifier, but instead use the ID of the node. > In the above example, "0:1:0" type of notation should never be used by nodes > (except maybe in the default node implementation). The tree should always use > the TreeNode.getNodeId for all node identification. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
