Your suggestion makes sense, but might be a bit limiting. What layout
rules would such a ButtonGroup container apply?
The current approach allows you to choose a layout that makes sense
(possibly distributing your buttons across multiple containers) yet
still get the grouping behavior your app needs.
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:16 PM, Scott Lanham wrote:
Hello,
I must be becoming one of those really annoying users.
This is just my opinion and should be ignored at will.
With button groups I think having a ButtonGroup container instance
to hold the
buttons is cleaner than having a static method that gets a
Button.Group. I
could then use something like:
<BoxPane orientation="vertical" styles="{padding:4}">
<ButtonGroup wtkx:id="numbersGroup">
<RadioButton wtkx:id="oneButton" buttonData="One"
selected="true"/>
<RadioButton wtkx:id="twoButton" buttonData="Two" />
<RadioButton wtkx:id="threeButton" buttonData="Three" />
</ButtonGroup>
<PushButton wtkx:id="selectButton" buttonData="Select"/>
</BoxPane>
Then in code:
@WTKX private ButtonGroup numbersGroup;
Which my little brain finds easier to work with rather than the
syntax in the
tutorial:
final Button.Group numbersGroup =
Button.getNamedGroups().get("numbers");
Cheers,
Scott.
