Thanks for the comments. I put the patch up in its current state if you are interested to look at how it works.
The reason why I prefer not to use suggestion box here is because it only allows the user to filter by the names of the gadgets as I understand it? With this implementation the user can filter both by the names and the descriptions of the gadgets. I think the functionality became quite nice. I guess what's missing from the suggestion box is to be able to chose a suggestion by the arrow keys, and to easily see what part of the word the suggestion box have found. Potentially both those alternatives could be implemented in this list instead at a later stage. What do you think? Then the reason to change the focus to the filter text box instead of the url textbox is that I believe that the default action now when there is more gadgets will be to filter the gadget you want rather than adding the url manually. Only in some more rare cases you will input your own url. But maybe my assumption is wrong here? Just my two cents, not to argue with you but just to clearify my thoughs :) /Olof 2012/2/19 Yuri Z <[email protected]> > See embedded > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Wave Grove <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I have started to implement wave-319 and have some questions about some > > implementation choices. > > > > First of all, could someone please assign that jira-issue to me - jira > > username Rocklund > > > I ll ask Michael to add you as contributor to the Jira, that would enable > you to assign issues to yourself. > > > > > 1. I am thinking to reuse some of the code mentioned in the jira-issue ( > > http://goo.gl/nEem2). Especially I was thinking of the GadgetInfo-class > > and > > some of the ideas around the GadgetInfoProvider. Would that be ok, or is > > there some licencing problems with that? > > > It's Ok. > > > > > 2. Should I keep the list of gadget info as source code for now, or > should > > I try to extract the info as an XML file that gets loaded instead? > > > > XML is fine, or maybe even JSON. IMO it would be best to serve the list > of gadgets from dedicated servlet. Hopefully, in the future we would be > able to host one centralized server with gadget definitions that will be > updated by community and all the rest WIAB servers will fetch it from > there. > > > > > 3. The issue suggests using a SuggestionBox for filtering the gadgets. > > However, I think it is nicer to directly filter the scrollable gadget > list. > > Any comments about that? > > > IMO suggestions box is more user friendly. Or you can have both. > > > > > 4. Furthermore I'm thinking to change the default focus to the filter box > > instead of the url box, and make it possible to select the topmost > filtered > > option by pressing enter. Also making it visible that the topmost > filtered > > option is selected by setting a gray background as if it was hovered. Any > > comments? > > > I personally prefer not to change the default focus. > > > > > I have a patch ready with those implementation if someone would like to > try > > it out? I need to do quite a bit polishing of the code before I can > commit > > it for review though. > > > > You can send it for review as is and update in later versions. > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any comments or help. > > /Olof > > >
