I think it is much better.

As for the TreeTable: The new TreeTable that I plan (without those
neat lines but also without layout problems) is not alive yet. And the
one that we already have should be moved back to extensions. I don't
think we need (nor should have) TreeTable in core.

-Matej

On 6/10/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
if it is really better then do it now before we put out rcs. also what
happens to treetable? that should prob also move to extensions?

-igor


On 6/10/07, Matej Knopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I hope this e-mail won't upset anyone too much.
>
> Let me summarize our tree components situation first.
>
> We have Tree and TreeTable components in core, and another Tree
> component in extensions.
>
> The Tree from extensions is the oldest one, without Ajax support.
> The Tree in core (as well as TreeTable) supports Ajax, but
> unfortunately suffers from layout problems and layout limitations,
> such as fixed line height, no way to wrap tree text or no way to add
> horizontal scrolling. Also the Tree is a bit difficult to customize.
>
> Fortunately, the base class that encapsulates the hard work (tree
> logic), AbstractTree, is pretty much presentation agnostic and it's
> not a big problem to build another component on it which would solve
> those layout problems.
>
> In fact, I've already such component done. It supports variable
> heights, content wrapping and horizontal scrolling. But the question
> is, where (and maybe even if) should we put it?
>
> The solution I want to propose may sound a bit radical. So I expected
> people want to yell on me and/or want kick my ball.
>
> Yet I'd like to
>
>    a) remove the old (kinda unsupported) tree from extensions (is
> anyone even use it?)
>    b) move the current Tree and TreeTable* from core to extensions
> (sight, i know we moved it into core just recently)
>    c) move the new Tree into core.
>
> * I don't think it's a good idea to have a TreeTable in core anyway.
> We don't have DataTable in core and I'm pretty sure much more people
> are using DataTable then TreeTable.
>
> So... I know it's kinda late for things like this. But i was way too
> busy to do this sooner. Sorry.
>
> -Matej
>

Reply via email to