...with a dynamically-generated schema since the set of legal constructs depends on what is on the classpath...
Or something like that. ;-) On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Ed Merks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kevin, > > It's almost like you need a model of the widgets. :-P > > > Kevin McGuire wrote: > > > Hi Ralf, > > > Yes, that's also our preferred approach. In RAP we have an extension > > point for themeable widgets anyway (the RAP theming has to know about > > themeable widgets to keep styling and layout in sync between client and > > server). This is also a suitable place to register such an element name. > > I'm not sure whether such an extension point would also be appropriate > > for Eclipse in general. Who would have to register with such an > > extension point? The component provider, e.g. Nebula? > > Agree, I think that's along the lines of how it would work. Namespaces > aside, for each extended widget, someone (presumably the widget component > provider) needs to : > > - publish the set of properties each widget supports so that a > developer knows what to write in the curly CSS brackets (and we may want > for > a validator), > - describe to the platform the class of the widget which will match the > name appearing in the CSS file, > - describe to the platform the methods to invoke matching those > property values. > > > Kevin > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing [EMAIL > PROTECTED]://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev > >
_______________________________________________ eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
