You couldn't use an ancestor/relative source binding to find the parent UC, thus Avoiding having to give the UC a specific name?
Shane Shane Morris | Automatic Studio | [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | +61 438 818 888 On 28/10/2011, at 5:35 PM, "Greg Keogh" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I generally declare my dependency property as normal, then bind to it from the UserControl itself. So let’s say you had a real DP called TitleText, I’d do something like: <UserControl ... x:Name=”me”> <TextBlock Text=”{Binding TitleText,ElementName=me}” /> ... so now the owner of the UserControl can set TitleText and it will be reflected by the child control. Thanks Matt ... fabulous! I stared at this code for some time before I realised what was happening. I didn’t think of doing it this way around. You make a typical DP for TitleText then bind the child control to “its own control”. This works, but I have to x:Name the <UserControl> and bind use that name as the ElementName exactly as you say. Cheers, Greg _______________________________________________ ozwpf mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf
_______________________________________________ ozwpf mailing list [email protected] http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf
