Alex: Not looking for a guarantee, what I am hoping for is a group of folks with a critical eye and an impartial mind to take a look at the pro's and con's of this idea.
One thing that I know from years (decades) of doing software development; Sometimes "not invented here" syndrome causes otherwise rational developers to use FUD such as "it will degrade performance" or "there are more important features", to discredit worthwhile ideas. I've caught myself doing it from time to time as well. Hopefully lots of people will weigh in, and it will get the attention it merits. Paul --- In [email protected], Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Two will get you noticed. But regardless of the number of votes, it is still subjective and involves tradeoffs, so there is no number at which you are guaranteed to get a fix. > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Maciek Sakrejda > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 4:17 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > > > Out of curiosity, I checked JIRA and there are only six issues with 100+ > votes, so if you've got a lot of friends, you should be able to get in > the Top 10 Most Popular Bugs fairly easily... > > -----Original Message----- > From: aceoohay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:pauls%40compuace.com>> > Reply-To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com> > To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com> > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:59:07 -0000 > > Alex: > > I've got one vote from Jim Abbott on the bug. > > How many do I need before it makes a difference? > > Paul > > --- In [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com>, Alex Harui <aharui@> wrote: > > > > Probably not subclass, but maybe replace it. It will be a bunch > of work though. > > > > In theory the tabloop (if you don't use tabIndex) should be > hierarchical and go through one container then the next. But it > won't loop within a container if there are other tabbable entities. > > > > Besides the non-modal approach, you can always tabEnabled=false on > components not in the container of choice, or catch the focusOut > going outside the container and restore focus to someplace you > like. All three options would be less work, IMHO, than writing your > own focusmanager. > > > > I still wouldn't bet any money on your bugs being fixed, but I've > been wrong before. > > > > -Alex > > > > From: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of aceoohay > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 7:13 AM > > To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > > > > > > Alex: > > > > While I have never worked in a large environment such as the one > you > > are in, I believe I understand the issues. I have filed/refiled bug > > requests on the two issues mentioned below. Hopefully I am not > > spittin' in the wind. > > > > What we are trying to do with Flex is to create an environment > where > > the user does not need to leave our application to do most things, > > and we allow them to bring up many modules at the same time. We > need > > the ability to keep a user within a module preferably without > > rewriting everything we have done so far. > > > > A fellow named Josh suggested I might be able to sub-class the > Focus > > Manager, do you think this is a viable alternative? > > > > Paul > > > > --- In [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com>, Alex Harui <aharui@> wrote: > > > > > > In my understanding of accessibility rules, you need some > > consistent way of navigating to all controls w/o using a mouse. I'm > > not clear there is an existing pattern for what you want to do, but > > I'm no expert on the patterns. You mentioned that it works for > > existing Client/Server apps. How do they switch between panels > > without the mouse? > > > > > > You are always welcome to file bugs and enhancement requests, and > > now, even patches that propose the fix, but it all gets prioritized > > and I'd swear that 90% of it never gets done. Sorry for pooping on > > your ideas, but I'm just voicing my opinion that we've got way > > bigger fish to fry than those two issues. We also have performance > > and size issues that make me lean against adding lots of options to > > our code or doing anything that requires a few more milliseconds > for > > everyone. You aren't the only one I've told not to get their hopes > > up. I hate being the bad guy, but I also feel bad for those who > > take the time to submit an issue and have it rejected. Further, I > > have some idea of what our major goals are for any upcoming > > release. Based on that, in the prioritization committee, I'll be > > saying that your two ideas aren't as important as the other issues > > on our list and probably have workarounds. If you get bunches of > > votes, that'll pretty much drown me out, and believe me, I get > > overridden often, but then there'll still be issues of opportunity > > cost. If it does take me two days to do something, that's probably > > four other issues that could have been done instead. It's a > > complicated system of tradeoffs. > > > > > > I know it is frustrating when we don't have some feature that is > > important to you. As we move into the future, my goal is to make > > more hooks (so you can replace FocusManager if you want to) instead > > of adding switches and options that make the framework larger. You > > might see some of that by the time Flex 4 ships, but don't count on > > it. > > > > > > -Alex > > > > > > From: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com> > > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of aceoohay > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 6:04 PM > > > To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > > > > > > > > > Alex: > > > > > > How does this work against accessibility rules? > > > > > > First, I am suggesting something that enhances flexibility while > > > leaving the default behavior alone. Second, the current default > > > behavior irrespective of accessibility rules is counter > intuitive. > > > > > > Over time I have made two suggestions regarding how Flex should > > > behave, both of which would make Flex a substantially better > > product > > > and in both cases you shot them down because you "won't have > time." > > > Neither of the suggestions are difficult to implement, and both > > would > > > provide more control for folks who want to make real business > > > applications. > > > > > > The two suggestions are; > > > > > > 1) Fix the bug that causes dataGrid sorting to ralph on it's > shoes > > > when a date or number column has a null value in a cell. In this > > case > > > I suggested that a "data type" be definable for colums in a > > dataGrid > > > and null's be handled predictably (either sort high or low). > > > > > > 2) Fix the bug where tabbing through objects is counter intuitive > > and > > > behaves irrationally. Here I suggest that a tab loop "Region" be > > > definable at a container level. > > > > > > In both cases the "workarounds" are cumbersome and make the > > resultant > > > code look like a 2nd year programmer's hack job. I would think > that > > > Adobe would want a product that attracts business application > > > developers, not just web designers. When Adobe's folks (I assume > > that > > > you are a member of this group) refuse to even look at changes > that > > > would make it easier for someone doing this kind of development > to > > > make professional looking applications, it makes looking into > > > Silverlight ever so much more attractive. If Microsoft won't pay > > > attention at least you can blame it on them being so big. > > > > > > Why don't you run it up the flag pole, take a look at how much > time > > > it would actually take to implement, and see if anyone else would > > > find it a useful feature befor dismissing it out of hand. > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > --- In [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com>, Alex Harui <aharui@> wrote: > > > > > > > > No advantages using non-modal popups, just a way to get what > you > > > want. I doubt we'll have time to provide more control over > tabbing, > > > especially in a way that sort of works against accessibility > rules. > > > > > > > > If you are using ModuleLoader today, you can probably pass the > > > ModuleLoader to PopUpManager. There'll probably be some other > stuff > > > that needs to be fixed up, but that's what I'd try first. > > > > > > > > From: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of aceoohay > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 12:13 PM > > > > To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > > Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex: > > > > > > > > I am not sure precisely how to do what you are suggesting. > > > > > > > > What I currently do is to create modules for each panel, and > use > > > > moduleloader to add them to the stage. Are you suggesting that > > > > instead I use PopUpManager instead of moduleLoader? > > > > > > > > For my existing application it seems like a lot of work, and > just > > > > investigating the ramifications regarding intermodule > > communications > > > > and so on may be challenging. > > > > > > > > Are there any benefits/drawbacks of using non modal popups vs > > module > > > > loader other than the tab loop? > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>, Alex Harui <aharui@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why not just tile the application with non-modal popups? > > Wouldn't > > > > that get you what you want? > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of aceoohay > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 6:26 AM > > > > > To: [email protected]<mailto:flexcoders% 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > 40yahoogroups.com><mailto:flexcoders% > > > 40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > Subject: [flexcoders] Flex Enhancement, TabIndex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We write Client Server replacement applications using Flex. > One > > > > > thing that is problematic is the handling of tabIndexing > using > > > > Flex. > > > > > The problem; > > > > > > > > > > Flex use a Tab Loop for the entire application except popups. > > This > > > > > means if you are in panel A, reach the end using tab, it will > > move > > > > > to panel B, or elsewhere in your application. This is not the > > same > > > > > behavior that standard Client Server applications exhibit, > and > > is > > > > > undesireable. Adding tab indexes makes the problem worse > > because > > > if > > > > > you have multiple panels with overlapping tab indexes, it > will > > > > > bounce back and forth between panels. > > > > > > > > > > A Solution; > > > > > > > > > > On any container object such as panel, canvas, tabnavigator, > > hbox, > > > > > vbox, etc. allow a new boolean attribute "tabLoopContainer" > > with > > > > > true and false as the allowable values. This would then > cause a > > > > > local tab loop that would encompass only the objects within > > that > > > > > container. The default would be false, leaving the behavior > as > > it > > > > > currently exists. Any object with a separate tab loop would > > only > > > be > > > > > accessible by mouse click or programatically via set focus. > > > > > > > > > > I would like some feedback as to whether this seems > reasonable, > > > and > > > > > how I can get this in front of someone who could make it > hapen. > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
