Thanks Marco, I'll take a look and get back to you.

Sopot


On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Marco Descher <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hy Sopot,
>
> I created a short demo, and pushed it to gerrit in
> https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/18813/ . A sample plug-in consuming the
> respective extension point is available on
> https://github.com/col-panic/generic-stuff/commit/cb4cc272ab4d0da33cd7462519c0ed51231fc029.
>
> It is intentionally kept simple, and hacked!! So for an element of type
> MPart you get an additional CTabItem where currently simply the ID
> attribute is mirrored.
>
> It should show the basic concept and point out the required refactorings?!
>
> cheers,
> marco
>
> Am 20.11.2013 um 09:59 schrieb Sopot Çela <[email protected]>:
>
> Marco would you be able to make a proof of concept for one element (say
> MPart) and throw it on gerrit? I like the idea in principle but it would be
> great to have something to see and extend and get the feel of it from my
> keyboard.
>
> Sopot
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Lars Vogel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we should avoid a dependency to ECP.
>>
>> At some point the tooling should migrate to PDE or platform and these
>> tools can AFAIK not depend on a higher level in Eclipse.
>>
>> Best regards, Lars
>> Am 19.11.2013 21:25 schrieb "Jonas Helming" <[email protected]
>> >:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>> I totally like the idea. However, it reminds me to an idea I have since
>>> a long time, which is related to your question.
>>> When Tom implemented the first version of the e4 tools editor, he
>>> actually contacted me if the EMF Client Platform could be used for this.
>>> Back than, ECP had some restrictions:
>>>
>>> 1. The form-based editor was not really usable stand-alone or embeddable
>>> 2. We did not really support to customize the layout
>>> 3. We did not support a Master Detail view within a form
>>>
>>> In the mean time, these restrictions are not valid anymore:
>>> 1. The editor component can be used stand-alone and embedded everywere,
>>> it is a sub component called EMF Forms
>>> 2. The layout of the form-based UI can itself be described with an EMF
>>> model (see
>>> http://eclipsesource.com/blogs/tutorials/emf-client-platform-how-to-customize-the-editor-layout/
>>> )
>>> 3. We currently develop a master detail view, which is almost finished
>>>
>>> Major advantages of this would be IMHO:
>>> 1. The code base of the e4 editor would get drastically smaller and
>>> would only focus on e4 model specific aspects
>>> 2. Custom Applications elements can be edited without any adaption, as
>>> ECP still support reflective UIs
>>> 3. The layout of the editor can be easily customized by users using a
>>> view model
>>> 4. New concepts such as the one you describe can be asily added
>>> 5. The e4 editor would benefit from ECP features, e.g. validation
>>>
>>> The main disadvantage is of course that this would require initial
>>> effort. Your suggested solution is of course much easier to implement for
>>> now. Additionally e4 Tools would get a depenency to ECP.
>>>
>>> I just wanted to share this thought to get peoples opinions.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Jonas
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 19.11.2013 13:05, schrieb Marco Descher:
>>>
>>> Hy List,
>>>
>>>  WHAT
>>>
>>>  I would like to add horizontal extension possibility to the e4
>>> tooling. That is, there already is the possibility to add new elements to
>>> the application model, and provide ones own editors
>>> for the e4 tooling.  I would like to extend the tooling for already
>>> available elements by adding an extension point to the tooling itself.
>>>
>>>  WHY
>>>
>>>  I want to enrich already available elements with additional
>>> information. This could for example be used to add documentation
>>> information to all elements of the application model,
>>> or would allow me to e.g. create an additional tab, valid only if I use
>>> the SWT renderer, allowing me to do deeper inspection of the model.
>>>
>>>  HOW
>>>
>>>  I plan to create an extension point allowing to contribute tabs to
>>> given elements, as can be seen in the following image. The extension point
>>> will have to define for
>>> what model elements the contributed tab is valid, and on call of the
>>> editor the full model will be passed.
>>> <Mail-Anhang.png>
>>>
>>>  Can you please give me any feedback, on what you think about this, who
>>> would back/mentor this implementation, and what he/she would do different?
>>>
>>>  Thanks,
>>> marco
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> e4-dev mailing 
>>> [email protected]https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> e4-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev

Reply via email to