By the way, this suggestion doesn't invalidate any of the (extensive) work that Noel has done recently with TextArea. In fact, it wouldn't be possible without it. I'm just wondering if a supporting read-only text pane might be a better long-term strategy than supporting rich text authoring...
On Sep 9, 2010, at 9:42 PM, Greg Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm about ready to check in final support for the new TextArea. There are > still a few bugs to work out, but it is mostly functional. > > I'd like to raise the question again of what to call the new "rich text > area". I'm still pretty excited about the concept of a "TextPane" component - > this would be a container whose primary purpose is to support text-based > layouts that aren't easily achievable (or even possible) using some of our > other layout containers. For example, designers of complex text-based forms > could really benefit from such a component. > > The existing (rich) TextArea class can certainly be used for this purpose, > but it currently has a lot of baggage since it supports editing. A pure "text > pane" wouldn't need such support, so it would significantly simplify the > codebase if we were to eliminate it. > > I think there may be a lot more long-term value in a "TextPane" class than a > "RichTextArea" component. It would also be a lot easier to maintain (which is > a very valid concern in a volunteer-driven effort like Pivot). > > We don't necessarily need to decide right now, but I'm thinking that > "TextPane" might be a more appropriate name for this component either way. It > also has a bit more parity with the "org.apache.pivot.wtk.text" package, and > the view classes, which currently live in org.apache.pivot.wtk.skin, could be > moved to org.apache.pivot.wtk.skin.text. > > Let me know what you think. > > G >
