Hi Artem, Jonathan,
I agree with what you say, except for using the initOwner() to imply
some particular (and implicit) style that is going to be applied to the
window. We should evaluate first whether the current implementation is
sufficient. And no, I don't see a reason to disable maximization for a
resizable window.
Jonathan: what is your opinion on using the setResizable(false) for the
use cases that you outlined?
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 07/23/2013 02:39 PM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
On 7/22/2013 9:17 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
Hi Artem,
Do you propose to add another StageStyle - namely, a DIALOG? Note that
styles cannot be combined in a mask, meaning that developers won't be
able to create e.g. transparent dialogs, or utility dialogs.
There is no need in yet another StageStyle, because we already have
this: Window.initOwner(). If we pass the owner to the platform, and set
appropriate hints for owned/ownerless windows, we should look and behave
similar to native apps.
Generally, I like the idea of defining the purpose of a window and
letting the OS/GUI toolkit decide what works best for it, but I'm not
sure if we can apply it for this particular use case. Also, I think that
ability to disable maximization/minimization of a window might be useful
for purposes other than just displaying dialogs.
To me, making a window non-resizable is a good way to make the window
unmaximizable. Do you see any cases, when a window should be resizable,
but not maximizable?
BTW, isn't the setResizable(false) a good approximation for our
requirements? You can still minimize such a window, but I think this is
reasonable. E.g. OS X will minimize both the dialog and its owner
window, allowing a user to perform other tasks unrelated to the dialog
and windows it blocks. Why do we want to disable minimization?
Unminimizable windows are annoying. If we disable that, we'll likely get
some weirdness, e.g. Win+M or Win+D on Windows will leave the window on
the desktop, which is not what users expect.
Thanks,
Artem
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 07/22/2013 07:20 PM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
On 7/22/2013 11:14 AM, Pavel Safrata wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
I believe this has been neither requested nor discussed so far. I don't
see why this couldn't be added, it just might have to be a conditional
feature, we'll have to check. Feel free to file a feature request.
Some native platforms (mostly, X window managers) don't provide direct
APIs to enable/disable certain window decoration buttons. A library or
an application may provides some hints, which may or may not be
respected by WM.
I like what we have right now, StageStyle approach. Application defines
the purpose of the window and let the platform decide, what are
available actions for it.
Thanks,
Artem
Regards,
Pavel
On 21.7.2013 4:44, Jonathan Giles wrote:
Hi all,
For once this is a request for more information from another JavaFX
team, rather than a review request, etc! :-)
I'm keen to see support in JavaFX Stage / Window classes for an API
that would allow for the minimize / maximize / full screen / etc
buttons to be disabled. I'm aware of the StageStyle.UTLITY option
(which does disable the minimize button), but sometimes you don't want
a utility stage style, but you do want to prevent minimizing a stage.
My particular use case is dialogs - you can see a discussion of the
issue at [1].
For example, I note that Stage has an iconfied property to represent
whether the stage is minimized, but no property to specify whether the
stage should be allowed to be iconified (setIconifiable(boolean),
boolean isIconifiable(), for example). Is there a reason for this or
just that this API hasn't been required yet?
In short, I would love API to allow me to specify whether a stage can
be minimised, maximised and made full screen, and for this to follow
through to the buttons available in the native titlebar area of the
stage. Does such an API exist, is there a valid reason why it doesn't,
or should I file a jira to request such API?
[1]
https://bitbucket.org/controlsfx/controlsfx/issue/49/dialogs-should-use-native-title-bars
Thanks!
-- Jonathan
