--- Jan Hoskens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're right, the class/new combination is close tho what I was thinking of! > Only, I don't see this in combination with a binding file (yet?). It would
It is not in the patch file yet, but I have class/new working in the binding also. Will be uploading soon, possibly today but no guaranties on the timing. > be nice to use a sort of catalog, as you mentioned. Creating your widgets, > putting them in appropriate catalog files and then including them in your > actual definition file (something like the <cinclude:include > src="catalog...">). One definition per widget for all your different forms! I would be very happy if someone extended the code to also use external definitions. From a design standpoint, I was thinking of making use of the "cocoon:/" protocol to allow the external definitions to reside anywhere. > Thankz Marc! I'll be trying out that class/new stuff any moment now! Let me know what you think, as I am working on the code now to get it ready to commit to CVS. BTW: Look at the "struct" widget in the patch also. You can use it to wrap a set of widgets in a namespace to prevent naming conflicts. This comes in handy when using "new" to create several instances of the same "class" in what would otherwise be the same namespace. --Tim Larson __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
