Let's leave it for now implementation part and get back for a moment where require indicator should be placed. I see one scenario where it will looks pretty weird when you have:
L C * Scenario is where I have form which has in one line two Form items. Example [1] It will looks like that in your idea: L L C * C * Do you think that in this case require indicator is better here: L* L* C C Thoughts ? [1] https://imgur.com/H5EmZrs Thanks, Piotr czw., 24 sty 2019 o 17:57 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> napisał(a): > El jue., 24 ene. 2019 a las 17:38, Piotr Zarzycki (< > [email protected]>) escribió: > > > In case of your implementation proposition - I'm not going to touch at > all > > any layout part stuff, cause there is an issue there - I have described > it > > in the earlier emails. > > > > Right, but we must solve it to get something more final, maybe it can be > delayed for now > But you'll need in that case change layout to vertical and change view to > the new one ("Stacked") > > > > > > It seems to me that you are agree with me on having separate View which > > handles case above. > > > yes > > > > In terms of handling that case - in whatever direction > > we will go > > > > L L* > > C* OR C > > > > better first, for what I said in previous response > > > > > > Do you think that we should have additional container for L or C which > > where ? > > > > <Group> - Horizotnal layout > > L * OR C * > > </Group> > > > > No. This: > IFormItemContentArea: ClassReference("org.apache.royale.jewel.Group") > > is ok since we change layout of elements through IFormItemLayout > > so this: > > IFormItemLayout: ClassReference( > "org.apache.royale.jewel.beads.layouts.VerticalLayout") > > should remain as is to layout contents vertically (by default) > > > > If you have other idea let me know. > > > > Thanks, > > Piotr > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 5:30 PM Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Carlos, > > > > > > Why you are proposing have that? > > > > > > L > > > C * > > > > > > I'm in favor of staying > > > > > > L * > > > C > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Piotr > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 4:56 PM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I forgot to mention about IBeadLayout more, since it could be > > >> misinterpreted: > > >> > > >> IBeadLayout for the global component is important, but what I'm > > >> considering > > >> is that although we can put HorizontalLayout (for the current > FormtItem) > > >> and VerticalLayout (for the stacked), I'm seeing that many components > > >> would > > >> need its own layout class. In this case we could create a > > FormItemLayout, > > >> and this will handle the layout vía CSS as it happens mostly in many > > other > > >> Jewel component. > > >> > > >> (Just say that some of them are using an standard layout class, like > > >> HorizontalLayout, or even a NullLayout class), since I didn't have the > > >> time > > >> to create its own one, and that's temporal. But my plan is to create a > > >> concrete layout for some of this components. FormItem could be one of > > >> those > > >> cases, for what we're seeing > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> El jue., 24 ene. 2019 a las 16:50, Carlos Rovira (< > > >> [email protected]>) > > >> escribió: > > >> > > >> > Hi Piotr, > > >> > > > >> > looking at the screen shot, seems the required indicator is > positioned > > >> to > > >> > the right side of the element, what seems coherent, although could > be > > a > > >> bit > > >> > problematic depending on the width of the component. we assume a > fixed > > >> > width (to the widest element) and align all required (or not a put > the > > >> > required indicator just before the element, anyway this seems > > something > > >> to > > >> > be solved as we have some real implementation. > > >> > > > >> > In order to implement it: > > >> > > > >> > We have 3 parts: > > >> > - L (this is the label) > > >> > - * (this is the required indicator) > > >> > - C (this is the element(s) that the user adds) > > >> > > > >> > * Actual FormItem is : > > >> > > > >> > L * C > > >> > > > >> > * We want for the new > > >> > > > >> > L > > >> > C * > > >> > > > >> > So it seems to me that > > >> > > > >> > a) IBeadLayout: ClassReference( > > >> > "org.apache.royale.jewel.beads.layouts.HorizontalLayout") > > >> > Does not has much sense to me > > >> > > > >> > b) IFormItemLayout: ClassReference( > > >> > "org.apache.royale.jewel.beads.layouts.VerticalLayout") > > >> > > > >> > This is the one important to me (to configure), so user can change > > >> layout > > >> > of the content part > > >> > > > >> > c) IBeadView: ClassReference( > > >> > "org.apache.royale.jewel.beads.views.FormItemView") > > >> > IFormItemContentArea: > ClassReference("org.apache.royale.jewel.Group") > > >> > > > >> > These are the parts important to me. > > >> > > > >> > I think we really want to change only the IBeadView, so we can have > a > > >> > FormItemView and a StackedFormItemView, and could change it vía > > >> className > > >> > (for example) > > >> > > > >> > Let me know your thought about it > > >> > > > >> > thanks > > >> > > > >> > Carlos > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > El jue., 24 ene. 2019 a las 16:08, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > >> > [email protected]>) escribió: > > >> > > > >> >> Carlos, > > >> >> > > >> >> I have analyzed FormItem in Flex and here is how it is done there. > > >> >> StackedFormItemSkin is using FormItemLayout which is constrained > > into 3 > > >> >> columns (sequenceCol, contentCol and helpCol) and 2 rows. [1][2] > > >> >> > > >> >> When you look into the screenshot [2] you may think that reuired > > >> indicator > > >> >> is part of the content, but it's not. It's not even part of the > > layout > > >> >> cause it has includeInLayout="false". [3] > > >> >> In Royale we don't have concept that something doesn't belong to > > layout > > >> >> and > > >> >> is not calculated and indicator default is being placed in > different > > >> area. > > >> >> Do you have some idea apart what I have proposed how to resolve > that > > ? > > >> >> > > >> >> [1] https://paste.apache.org/9Imj > > >> >> [2] https://imgur.com/GGOtzEU > > >> >> [3] https://paste.apache.org/kqlP > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, > > >> >> Piotr > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> śr., 23 sty 2019 o 18:08 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected] > > > > >> >> napisał(a): > > >> >> > > >> >> > That's more clear to me. I will check and get back to you. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Thank you! > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > śr., 23 sty 2019 o 18:03 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > > >> >> > napisał(a): > > >> >> > > > >> >> >> No, > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> I was asking you about how flex solves visualy the problem in > > their > > >> >> >> stacked > > >> >> >> version. The required icon is setup next to the label? is in > other > > >> >> place? > > >> >> >> if we had an image of how it is designed (and like it), we can > > copy > > >> >> it. I > > >> >> >> still not proposing a technical solution. Just that I don't have > > >> clear > > >> >> how > > >> >> >> we should layout it > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> El mié., 23 ene. 2019 a las 17:29, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > >> >> >> [email protected]>) escribió: > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Carlos, > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Your suggestion is to have new form item (StackedFormItem) > with > > >> new > > >> >> >> > StackedFormItemView - cause problem is inside FormitemView, > not > > >> >> inside > > >> >> >> > layout itself. Current layout is doing what it should do - > apart > > >> of > > >> >> the > > >> >> >> > problem - it's making children to be Horizontal/Vertical. > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > If I'm correct what you are saying - that's ok, but if you > have > > >> had > > >> >> >> > different idea by saying above let me know. > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Thanks, Piotr > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > śr., 23 sty 2019 o 17:14 Carlos Rovira < > [email protected] > > > > > >> >> >> > napisał(a): > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > Ok, I understand now. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > In Flex I think we had that layout and was > > >> >> called....StackedFormItem > > >> >> >> or > > >> >> >> > > something like that? > > >> >> >> > > Could you check how Flex solve this? If we continue liking > the > > >> way > > >> >> >> > stacked > > >> >> >> > > form layout in flex looks, we can do the same for our Royale > > >> >> version > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > El mié., 23 ene. 2019 a las 16:38, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > >> >> >> > > [email protected]>) escribió: > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > I'm not sure how Serkan is doing that on users forum, but > I > > >> see > > >> >> all > > >> >> >> > hist > > >> >> >> > > > pasted images. Anyway here you go: > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > What I wanted to achieve: https://snag.gy/DmH7yk.jpg > > >> >> >> > > > What I got from Jewel FormItem: > https://snag.gy/Slfbt9.jpg > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > śr., 23 sty 2019 o 16:28 Carlos Rovira < > > >> [email protected]> > > >> >> >> > > > napisał(a): > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > Piotr, > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > remember that images pasted in list are not shared, you > > must > > >> >> share > > >> >> >> > with > > >> >> >> > > > > some image service > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > El mié., 23 ene. 2019 a las 16:14, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > >> >> >> > > > > [email protected]>) escribió: > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > There is one more problem with Layout. Currently > default > > >> in > > >> >> >> > framework > > >> >> >> > > > we > > >> >> >> > > > > > have [1]. It means that: > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > My content of FormItem will be vertical and > IBeadLayout > > is > > >> >> >> > basically > > >> >> >> > > > > > ignored at some point. If I specify beads - > > >> HorizontalLayout > > >> >> as > > >> >> >> it > > >> >> >> > is > > >> >> >> > > > in > > >> >> >> > > > > > above example it will be taken as a primary and I have > > my > > >> >> >> content > > >> >> >> > > > laying > > >> >> >> > > > > > out horizontally. The question is - what is for > > >> >> >> IFormItemLayout in > > >> >> >> > > > > > default.css? Is it a bug? > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > [1] https://paste.apache.org/rV0K > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > śr., 23 sty 2019 o 15:46 Piotr Zarzycki < > > >> >> >> [email protected] > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > napisał(a): > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Hi Carlos, > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> I'm was trying to change FormItem to be Vertical > > >> oriented. > > >> >> In > > >> >> >> > > general > > >> >> >> > > > I > > >> >> >> > > > > >> would like to have following view. Label of FormItem > is > > >> on > > >> >> the > > >> >> >> top > > >> >> >> > > and > > >> >> >> > > > > in > > >> >> >> > > > > >> the bottom is content. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> [image: image.png] > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Code for that will looks like that [1]. Results is > > >> >> following: > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> [image: image.png] > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> It happened cause Label and required star label are > > >> >> different > > >> >> >> > > > components > > >> >> >> > > > > >> - everything is being laying out vertically. What is > > your > > >> >> >> > suggestion > > >> >> >> > > > to > > >> >> >> > > > > fix > > >> >> >> > > > > >> that ? > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Mine is wrapping "First name" and "*" into one Group > > with > > >> >> >> > > > > >> HorizontalLayout. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> More thoughts are welcome. I hope you see > screenshots. > > :) > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> [1] https://paste.apache.org/5odt > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Thanks, > > >> >> >> > > > > >> -- > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > > >> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > -- > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > -- > > >> >> >> > > > > Carlos Rovira > > >> >> >> > > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> >> >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > -- > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> >> > > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > -- > > >> >> >> > > Carlos Rovira > > >> >> >> > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > -- > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> >> > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> -- > > >> >> >> Carlos Rovira > > >> >> >> http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > -- > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> > > >> >> Piotr Zarzycki > > >> >> > > >> >> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > >> >> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > >> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Carlos Rovira > > >> > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Carlos Rovira > > >> http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
