Since the same discussion has raised up a couple of times now, I
suggest you again to reconsider adding an 'id' property to
wtk.Component. See this thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00686.html
My use case given there was not a good example -- this one is. It
seems strange to add a whole new palette of subclassed components just
to add an id property because Component hasn't one.
Dirk.
Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
One option would be to use the "automationID" property of Component.
However, I think a better approach would be to define a custom
subclass of whatever container type you are using, make it Bindable,
and add getters (but not setters) for each of the components you
retrieve from the WTKX file. That way, you get type safety and you
don't need to maintain two different identifiers for your components.
On Jun 6, 2010, at 11:09 AM, aappddeevv wrote:
I was looking to pass in a container to a method and then pull a
few components out by name (the container has a complex view and
the components I want to access by name are labels, a few labels
out of many labels) to do some processing on. This way I don?t have
to add property setters and getters in my container subclass. In my
method, I don?t have access to the serializer to obtain the
components by id.
However, a component name (an optional) property would do the
trick. Is there a way to assign a string ?name? to a component in
WTKX and access it later? In this context, a wtkx:id acts much like
a name but as near as I can tell the wtkx:id is only relevant as a
named component in the serializer versus a property of the
component itself.
--
Dirk Möbius
SCOOP GmbH
Am Kielshof 29
D-51105 Köln
Fon +49 221 801916-0
Fax +49 221 801916-17
Mobil +49 170 7363035
www.scoop-gmbh.de
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Köln
Handelsregister: Köln
Handelsregisternummer: HRB 36623
Geschäftsführer:
Dr. Oleg Balovnev
Frank Heinen
Dr. Wolfgang Reddig
Roland Scheel
