that seems to me like a bug, I think you'll need to workaround creating a normal css class selector and creating an extension class for j|Table that use that css selector for now. Although not tested and maybe that bug could reach that way too.
Something that leaves me uneasy is the use of the Jewel Table component (that is marked as "still in development") since I think is unfinished and with an incorrect API (the method "selectedItemProperty" should evolve to normal "selectedItem") and selection in fact was never finished. If someone has the time to work on that will be very appreciated. Thanks El lun., 23 dic. 2019 a las 16:37, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>) escribió: > If the objects can all subclass a base class then you can use one of our > fake type selectors. > > Alternatively, and I don't think we've tried this, but all interested > classes could load a bead that injects an additional classname/typename and > then the descendant CSS can use that instead of .datechooser. > > That said, it isn't clear to me why your descendant selector didn't work > so there might be a bug there. I don't know if SimpleCSSValuesImpl handles > descendant selectors. Cuz it is 'Simple' > > -Alex > > On 12/23/19, 7:22 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I need to add a bead to all Table objects in our application, but not > to Table objects contained within another specific css class. So in our css > I’ve defined > > j|Table { > IBeadView: ClassReference("classes.beads.GridLikeTableView"); > } > > But now I find that tables in a calendar are also affected, which is > unintended. So I tried adding before that > > .datechooser j|Table { > IBeadView: > ClassReference("org.apache.royale.jewel.beads.views.TableView"); > } > > But that affects all Table objects whether or not they’re contained in > a .datachooser class. Any ideas how to be more surgical about adding beads? > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
