Tink,
I know I agreed with you on this when 4.6 was prerelease but I think
Alex said until testing is working again, nothing major should happen
to the code base.
Also, there is a lot of talk about keeping things simple and getting a
release out the door without changing to much,
I am for getting the concrete references out of the base components. I
would help do it with you. :)
So if you don't get a lot of interest right now, just wait until the
right time. I have things I want to get going to but it's still to
early.
Mike
I know I'm jumping the gun here but....
On Adobe's 4.6 list there seemed to be a decent amount of interest
in having an IView interface for use with the mobile navigators
instead of them being typed to View.
It seemed strange to me that Adobe choose to extend
SkinnableContainer for the View class for the following reasons.
1. You create instances of containers, and add elements to them.
With mobile navigators, they create the instance, so 99% of people
are extending view, it might as well be a Group, as you won't be
using Skin Parts.
2. If you are using Skin Parts, you'd want a SkinnableComponent, not
a container.
Both these reduce the DisplayObjects required. I just don't see a
user case for the heaviest option, a container, that no-one uses as
a container, and is what your stuck with as there is no interface.
With that in mind I put the necessary classes together for this. I
have an IView interface implemented throughout, although there is a
need here and there to cast to UIComponent for access to properties
and methods behing the mx_inernal namespace.
So I have a custom
NavigationStack
SlideViewTransition
View (implements IView)
ViewDescriptior
ViewNavigator
ViewNavigatorBase
ViewTransitionBase
and added
GroupView
IView
SkinnableComponentView
would this sort of stuff be of interest, or should I continue to
push this stuff into my own open source lib?
Tink
