Not necessarily. I'm not making any assumptions about why the question was asked.
I've had a vaguely similar requirement that I believe was legitimate. In my case, I was using a tri-state checkbox where I wanted a user to be able to select all or clear all sub items. However, partially selected subitems should set the checkbox to indeterminate. In the compact framework, enabling tri-state resulted in indeterminate being directly selectable by the user, which had no sensible meaning in the context. Consequently, I disabled AutoCheck and handled the logic in code, preventing the user from directly selecting indeterminate. I was effectively differentiating between user and code state changes. David "If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards... checkmate!" -Zapp Brannigan, Futurama On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:41, Arjang Assadi <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi David, > > The requirements Yes, but the problem is different than the requirement. > Instead of working with a model he will be tweaking the UI to satify > some logic that requires the logic of UI and programming invoked > change to be handled differently. > > The checkbox will be overloaded with too many concerns, rather than > just being used as a GUI control to inform the user of a value and > allow the user to change it. > > Regards > > Arjang >
