You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> on 2006/10/04 18:28:11 UTC

Tree2

Hi *,

I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
have a discussion about some of the concepts.

First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
more with the values of the tree as well.

The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
"value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
are generally quite different).

Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
then render the nodes on the client dynamically.

Thoughts?

regards,

Martin

-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Kevin Galligan <kg...@gmail.com>.

Not sure about the whole dyamic rendering thing, but I also noticed
that the html was huge.  Any thoughts about that?  That was on the
list of things to look at and see if there was possibly a way to cut
that down.

On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> have a discussion about some of the concepts.
>
> First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> more with the values of the tree as well.
>
> The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> are generally quite different).
>
> Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at>.

Let me read the entire thread first :-)
later tonight

Matthias Wessendorf schrieb:
> I bet! :)
> 
> On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Precisely! Perhaps Werner can chime in some more on this too..
>>
>>
>> Z.

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

I bet! :)

On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Precisely! Perhaps Werner can chime in some more on this too..
>
>
> Z.
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org > wrote:
> > regarding the ajaxized version, would be cool if the renderer takes
> > care of dojo.
> > rendering out the <dojo:widget ..../> things and adding the dojo.js
> > file to the *header* of the page. So the widget "builds" the client
> > treee.
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia < zwadia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Right on. I think "drag and drop" node switching and editing should be
> part
> > > of an AJAXized implementation of the Tree component as that model suits
> it
> > > better.
> > >
> > > For better scope control perhaps we should have a baseTree and an
> > > advancedTree component set?
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Zubin.
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I haven't said that there is no value for that.
> > > > But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
> > > > Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
> > > > know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
> > > > don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.
> > > >
> > > > I think same is true for an editable table
> > > > (not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )
> > > >
> > > > -M
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia < zwadia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Matthias,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation
> -
> > > for
> > > > > example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where
> a
> > > > > Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and
> editable
> > > based
> > > > > on their changing business process and the type of content they wish
> to
> > > > > classify.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node
> > > editing
> > > > > for such scenarios:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Zubin.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an
> editable
> > > > > > value holder?
> > > > > > It just structures data :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an
> "input
> > > > > component".
> > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also
> > > validators
> > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic"
> tree
> > > use
> > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <martin.marinschek@gmail.com >
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values
> needs
> > > to
> > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree
> embedded
> > > in a
> > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces
> and
> > > the
> > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different)
> only
> > > save
> > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a
> dataTable,
> > > except
> > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead
> of
> > > > > "input data"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that
> you
> > > can
> > > > > say
> > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends
> > > CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is
> also
> > > used
> > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> > > > > EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's
> not
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we
> > > should
> > > > > do -
> > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make
> so
> > > much
> > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with
> the
> > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org >
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <
> martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering
> if
> > > we
> > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with
> > > selected
> > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener.
> This
> > > is
> > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should
> > > rather
> > > > > be a
> > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore,
> the
> > > tree
> > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we
> could
> > > do
> > > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In
> > > Trinidad
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also
> used
> > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that
> they
> > > > > Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current
> "value"
> > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be
> more
> > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since
> value
> > > makes
> > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was
> a
> > > > > "value" of
> > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to
> the
> > > > > markup of
> > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very
> > > large
> > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> > > > > transfer the
> > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a
> JS_engine
> > > to
> > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > blog:
> http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com>.

Precisely! Perhaps Werner can chime in some more on this too..

Z.

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> regarding the ajaxized version, would be cool if the renderer takes
> care of dojo.
> rendering out the <dojo:widget ..../> things and adding the dojo.js
> file to the *header* of the page. So the widget "builds" the client
> treee.
>
> -M
>
> On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Right on. I think "drag and drop" node switching and editing should be
> part
> > of an AJAXized implementation of the Tree component as that model suits
> it
> > better.
> >
> > For better scope control perhaps we should have a baseTree and an
> > advancedTree component set?
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Zubin.
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I haven't said that there is no value for that.
> > > But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
> > > Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
> > > know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
> > > don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.
> > >
> > > I think same is true for an editable table
> > > (not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )
> > >
> > > -M
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia < zwadia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Matthias,
> > > >
> > > > I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation
> -
> > for
> > > > example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where
> a
> > > > Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and
> editable
> > based
> > > > on their changing business process and the type of content they wish
> to
> > > > classify.
> > > >
> > > > In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node
> > editing
> > > > for such scenarios:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
> > > >
> > > > I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Zubin.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an
> editable
> > > > > value holder?
> > > > > It just structures data :)
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an
> "input
> > > > component".
> > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also
> > validators
> > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic"
> tree
> > use
> > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values
> needs
> > to
> > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree
> embedded
> > in a
> > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces
> and
> > the
> > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different)
> only
> > save
> > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a
> dataTable,
> > except
> > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead
> of
> > > > "input data"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that
> you
> > can
> > > > say
> > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends
> > CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is
> also
> > used
> > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> > > > EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's
> not
> > the
> > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we
> > should
> > > > do -
> > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make
> so
> > much
> > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with
> the
> > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org >
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <
> martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering
> if
> > we
> > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with
> > selected
> > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener.
> This
> > is
> > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should
> > rather
> > > > be a
> > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore,
> the
> > tree
> > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we
> could
> > do
> > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In
> > Trinidad
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also
> used
> > by
> > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that
> they
> > > > Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current
> "value"
> > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be
> more
> > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since
> value
> > makes
> > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was
> a
> > > > "value" of
> > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to
> the
> > > > markup of
> > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very
> > large
> > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> > > > transfer the
> > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a
> JS_engine
> > to
> > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

regarding the ajaxized version, would be cool if the renderer takes
care of dojo.
rendering out the <dojo:widget ..../> things and adding the dojo.js
file to the *header* of the page. So the widget "builds" the client
treee.

-M

On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right on. I think "drag and drop" node switching and editing should be part
> of an AJAXized implementation of the Tree component as that model suits it
> better.
>
> For better scope control perhaps we should have a baseTree and an
> advancedTree component set?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Zubin.
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I haven't said that there is no value for that.
> > But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
> > Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
> > know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
> > don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.
> >
> > I think same is true for an editable table
> > (not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia < zwadia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Matthias,
> > >
> > > I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation -
> for
> > > example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where a
> > > Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and editable
> based
> > > on their changing business process and the type of content they wish to
> > > classify.
> > >
> > > In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node
> editing
> > > for such scenarios:
> > >
> > > http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
> > >
> > > I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Zubin.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
> > > > value holder?
> > > > It just structures data :)
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > component".
> > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also
> validators
> > > > > on the tree?
> > > > >
> > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree
> use
> > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs
> to
> > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded
> in a
> > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and
> the
> > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only
> save
> > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable,
> except
> > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of
> > > "input data"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you
> can
> > > say
> > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends
> CollectionModel
> > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also
> used
> > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> > > EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not
> the
> > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we
> should
> > > do -
> > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so
> much
> > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if
> we
> > > could
> > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with
> selected
> > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This
> is
> > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should
> rather
> > > be a
> > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the
> tree
> > > should
> > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could
> do
> > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In
> Trinidad
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used
> by
> > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they
> > > Tree2
> > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value
> makes
> > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a
> > > "value" of
> > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the
> > > markup of
> > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very
> large
> > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> > > transfer the
> > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine
> to
> > > render
> > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

> For better scope control perhaps we should have a baseTree and an
> advancedTree component set?

yeah, maybe we go the route like Faces does it self.
A "generic" component (UITree) and some more specialized
(EditableTree) or what ever.

-M

>
> Cheers,
>
> Zubin.
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I haven't said that there is no value for that.
> > But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
> > Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
> > know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
> > don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.
> >
> > I think same is true for an editable table
> > (not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia < zwadia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Matthias,
> > >
> > > I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation -
> for
> > > example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where a
> > > Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and editable
> based
> > > on their changing business process and the type of content they wish to
> > > classify.
> > >
> > > In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node
> editing
> > > for such scenarios:
> > >
> > > http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
> > >
> > > I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Zubin.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
> > > > value holder?
> > > > It just structures data :)
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > component".
> > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also
> validators
> > > > > on the tree?
> > > > >
> > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree
> use
> > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs
> to
> > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded
> in a
> > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and
> the
> > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only
> save
> > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable,
> except
> > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of
> > > "input data"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you
> can
> > > say
> > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends
> CollectionModel
> > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also
> used
> > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> > > EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not
> the
> > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we
> should
> > > do -
> > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so
> much
> > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if
> we
> > > could
> > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with
> selected
> > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This
> is
> > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should
> rather
> > > be a
> > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the
> tree
> > > should
> > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could
> do
> > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In
> Trinidad
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used
> by
> > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they
> > > Tree2
> > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value
> makes
> > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a
> > > "value" of
> > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the
> > > markup of
> > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very
> large
> > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> > > transfer the
> > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine
> to
> > > render
> > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com>.

Right on. I think "drag and drop" node switching and editing should be part
of an AJAXized implementation of the Tree component as that model suits it
better.

For better scope control perhaps we should have a baseTree and an
advancedTree component set?

Cheers,

Zubin.

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I haven't said that there is no value for that.
> But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
> Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
> know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
> don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.
>
> I think same is true for an editable table
> (not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )
>
> -M
>
> On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Matthias,
> >
> > I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation -
> for
> > example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where a
> > Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and editable
> based
> > on their changing business process and the type of content they wish to
> > classify.
> >
> > In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node
> editing
> > for such scenarios:
> >
> > http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
> >
> > I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Zubin.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
> > > value holder?
> > > It just structures data :)
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > component".
> > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also
> validators
> > > > on the tree?
> > > >
> > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree
> use
> > > > case you are looking at.
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > >
> > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs
> to
> > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded
> in a
> > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and
> the
> > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only
> save
> > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > >
> > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable,
> except
> > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of
> > "input data"
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you
> can
> > say
> > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > >  |
> > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > >        |
> > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > >             |
> > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > >    |
> > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > >    |
> > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends
> CollectionModel
> > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also
> used
> > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> > EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not
> the
> > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we
> should
> > do -
> > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so
> much
> > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if
> we
> > could
> > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with
> selected
> > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This
> is
> > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should
> rather
> > be a
> > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the
> tree
> > should
> > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could
> do
> > a lot
> > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In
> Trinidad
> > the
> > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used
> by
> > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they
> > Tree2
> > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > appropriate
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value
> makes
> > sense on
> > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a
> > "value" of
> > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the
> > markup of
> > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very
> large
> > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> > transfer the
> > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine
> to
> > render
> > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

I haven't said that there is no value for that.
But I am abit against a "super tree component" :)
Maybe there is value for a "specialized" editable tree or what ever. I
know scenarios where that would be nice. but on the other hand you
don't want this "overhead" when just displaying structured data.

I think same is true for an editable table
(not a table w/ inputText in it... ;) )

-M

On 10/5/06, Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthias,
>
> I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation - for
> example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where a
> Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and editable based
> on their changing business process and the type of content they wish to
> classify.
>
> In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node editing
> for such scenarios:
>
> http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx
>
> I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Zubin.
>
>
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf < matzew@apache.org> wrote:
> > also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
> > value holder?
> > It just structures data :)
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> component".
> > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > on the tree?
> > >
> > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > case you are looking at.
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > >
> > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > >
> > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of
> "input data"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can
> say
> > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > >
> > > > > UIComponent
> > > > >  |
> > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > >        |
> > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > >             |
> > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > >
> > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > >
> > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > >    |
> > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > >
> > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > >    |
> > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> EditableValueHolder ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > -Matthias
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should
> do -
> > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org > wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> could
> > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> nodes.
> > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> somewhat
> > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather
> be a
> > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> should
> > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do
> a lot
> > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> the
> > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they
> Tree2
> > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> attribute to
> > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> appropriate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> sense on
> > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> value-attribute
> > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a
> "value" of
> > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the
> markup of
> > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> transfer the
> > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> node-type), and
> > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> render
> > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Zubin Wadia <zw...@gmail.com>.

Matthias,

I think the Tree component can be used in contexts beyond navigation - for
example, it can be implemented for Content/Document management where a
Category-DocumentType heirarchy needs to be user managed and editable based
on their changing business process and the type of content they wish to
classify.

In the .NET world - this excellent Tree component also supports Node editing
for such scenarios:

http://www.componentart.com/treeview/features.aspx

I believe there is value in the use-case Martin is describing.

Cheers,

Zubin.


On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
> value holder?
> It just structures data :)
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> component".
> > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > on the tree?
> >
> > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > case you are looking at.
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Matthias,
> > >
> > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > >
> > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of
> "input data"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can
> say
> > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > >
> > > > UIComponent
> > > >  |
> > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > >        |
> > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > >             |
> > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > >
> > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > >
> > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > >    |
> > > >    + UIXTree
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > UIXIterator
> > > >    |
> > > >    + UIXTable
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > >
> > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be
> EditableValueHolder ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > -Matthias
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi *,
> > > > >
> > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should
> do -
> > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> could
> > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> nodes.
> > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> somewhat
> > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather
> be a
> > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> should
> > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do
> a lot
> > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> the
> > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they
> Tree2
> > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> attribute to
> > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> appropriate
> > > > > >
> > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> sense on
> > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> value-attribute
> > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a
> "value" of
> > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the
> markup of
> > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> HTML-bases
> > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only
> transfer the
> > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> node-type), and
> > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> render
> > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

also why should a tree, used for navigation structure be an editable
value holder?
It just structures data :)

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input component".
> What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> on the tree?
>
> maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> case you are looking at.
>
> On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Matthias,
> >
> > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> >
> > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input data"
> > >
> > >
> > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > "var" on those tags.
> > >
> > > UIComponent
> > >  |
> > >  + - UIXComponent
> > >        |
> > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > >             |
> > >             + UIXCollection
> > >
> > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > >
> > > UIXHierarchy
> > >    |
> > >    + UIXTree
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > UIXIterator
> > >    |
> > >    + UIXTable
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > by the Trin Table.
> > >
> > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder ?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi *,
> > > >
> > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do -
> > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > >
> > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > Hi M-
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
> > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > >
> > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> > > > >
> > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
> > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > >
> > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
> > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > >
> > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
> > > > > on the client side?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Hi,

did just that:

http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMAHAWK-739

regards,

Martin

On 10/14/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem was that you changed the TreeWalker interface.  I've fixed
> my TreeWalker implementations but everyone else is going to have to do
> the same.  I suggest at a minimum that you create a JIRA issue and
> mark it resolved so it makes it into the release notes.
>
> Sean
>
> On 10/10/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yeah. I've already settled for a subclass. I had to copy over almost
> > everything from the tree-sources. The only thing which rescued me from
> > having to copy all was introducing the interface. Sean, is there a way
> > you can get the interface working according to your needs?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/10/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I don't want the tree to _contain_ EditableValueHolders, but the tree
> > > > to be an EditableValueHolder itself - imagine a dropdown which shows a
> > > > tree, and you can select values from it...
> > >
> > > maybe a subclass is needed here, since that seams not to be a common
> > > use case, right?
> > >
> > > (I think we already said that during this thread)
> > >
> > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/10/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Martin,
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
> > > > > implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
> > > > > types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
> > > > > editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
> > > > > node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
> > > > > the problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
> > > > > TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
> > > > > UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
> > > > > done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
> > > > > with what you have.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> > > > > > until end of November, can't take off a week.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> > > > > > >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > > > > > > some of your ideas in person as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sean
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > > > > > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > > > > > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > > > > > > work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > hi Arash,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > > > > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -M
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > > > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > > > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > > > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > > > > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > > > > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > > > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > > > > > > under debate.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > > > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > > > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > > > > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > > > > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Arash
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > > > > > > component".
> > > > > > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > > > > > > data"
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > > > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > > > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > > > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > > > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > > > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > > > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > > > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > > > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.

The problem was that you changed the TreeWalker interface.  I've fixed
my TreeWalker implementations but everyone else is going to have to do
the same.  I suggest at a minimum that you create a JIRA issue and
mark it resolved so it makes it into the release notes.

Sean

On 10/10/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah. I've already settled for a subclass. I had to copy over almost
> everything from the tree-sources. The only thing which rescued me from
> having to copy all was introducing the interface. Sean, is there a way
> you can get the interface working according to your needs?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/10/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I don't want the tree to _contain_ EditableValueHolders, but the tree
> > > to be an EditableValueHolder itself - imagine a dropdown which shows a
> > > tree, and you can select values from it...
> >
> > maybe a subclass is needed here, since that seams not to be a common
> > use case, right?
> >
> > (I think we already said that during this thread)
> >
> >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/10/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Martin,
> > > >
> > > > What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
> > > > implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
> > > > types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
> > > > editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
> > > > node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
> > > > the problem.
> > > >
> > > > Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
> > > > TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
> > > > UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
> > > > done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
> > > > with what you have.
> > > >
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> > > > > until end of November, can't take off a week.
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> > > > > >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > > > > > some of your ideas in person as well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sean
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > > > > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > > > > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > > > > > work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > hi Arash,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > > > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -M
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > > > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > > > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > > > > > under debate.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > > > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > > > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Arash
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > > > > > component".
> > > > > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > > > > > data"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Yeah. I've already settled for a subclass. I had to copy over almost
everything from the tree-sources. The only thing which rescued me from
having to copy all was introducing the interface. Sean, is there a way
you can get the interface working according to your needs?

regards,

Martin

On 10/10/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I don't want the tree to _contain_ EditableValueHolders, but the tree
> > to be an EditableValueHolder itself - imagine a dropdown which shows a
> > tree, and you can select values from it...
>
> maybe a subclass is needed here, since that seams not to be a common
> use case, right?
>
> (I think we already said that during this thread)
>
>
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/10/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Martin,
> > >
> > > What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
> > > implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
> > > types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
> > > editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
> > > node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
> > > the problem.
> > >
> > > Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
> > > TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
> > > UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
> > > done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
> > > with what you have.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> > > > until end of November, can't take off a week.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> > > > >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > > > > some of your ideas in person as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > > > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > > > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > > > > work.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > hi Arash,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -M
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > > > > under debate.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Arash
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > > > > component".
> > > > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > > > > data"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

> I don't want the tree to _contain_ EditableValueHolders, but the tree
> to be an EditableValueHolder itself - imagine a dropdown which shows a
> tree, and you can select values from it...

maybe a subclass is needed here, since that seams not to be a common
use case, right?

(I think we already said that during this thread)


> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/10/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Martin,
> >
> > What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
> > implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
> > types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
> > editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
> > node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
> > the problem.
> >
> > Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
> > TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
> > UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
> > done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
> > with what you have.
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> > > until end of November, can't take off a week.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> > > >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > > > some of your ideas in person as well.
> > > >
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > > > work.
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > hi Arash,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -M
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > > > under debate.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Arash
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > > > component".
> > > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > > > data"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Hi Sean,

ok, I see - I thought it would be good to separate Tree and TreeWalker
a bit more, so that I could reuse at least some of the functionality.

I don't want the tree to _contain_ EditableValueHolders, but the tree
to be an EditableValueHolder itself - imagine a dropdown which shows a
tree, and you can select values from it...

regards,

Martin

On 10/10/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martin,
>
> What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
> implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
> types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
> editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
> node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
> the problem.
>
> Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
> TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
> UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
> done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
> with what you have.
>
> Sean
>
> On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> > until end of November, can't take off a week.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> > >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > > some of your ideas in person as well.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > > work.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > hi Arash,
> > > > >
> > > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > > >
> > > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > > >
> > > > > -M
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > > under debate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Arash
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > > component".
> > > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > > data"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.

Martin,

What is the big deal about EditableValueHolder?  Why should tree2
implement this?  The idea is that Tree2 contains a tree of whatever
types of JSF components you choose (just like dataTable.)  You can use
editable value holders right now if you want to.  Just add one to your
node.  I am probably missing something but at the moment I fail to see
the problem.

Also, your tree intereface has broken some things on my end.
TreeWalker now needs to take an instance of Tree instead of
UITreeData.  This breaks some custom tree implementations that I have
done offline so I may need to revert that.  Let me see if I can work
with what you have.

Sean

On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
> until end of November, can't take off a week.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
> >  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> > some of your ideas in person as well.
> >
> > Sean
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > > work.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > hi Arash,
> > > >
> > > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > > >
> > > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > -M
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > > directory services, etc)
> > > > >
> > > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > > under debate.
> > > > >
> > > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > > >
> > > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Arash
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > > component".
> > > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > > on the tree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > > data"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > > ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > > render
> > > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

No, it's a pity that not, but I can't. I'm at a client here in Germany
until end of November, can't take off a week.

regards,

Martin

On 10/5/06, Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
>  Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
> some of your ideas in person as well.
>
> Sean
>
> On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> > which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> > is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> > work.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > hi Arash,
> > >
> > > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> > >
> > > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> > >
> > > -M
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello Mattias,
> > > >
> > > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > > one of the following purposes:
> > > >
> > > > 1) selecting one item
> > > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > > directory services, etc)
> > > >
> > > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > > under debate.
> > > >
> > > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > > >
> > > >  1) simplifying development
> > > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > >
> > > > Arash
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > > component".
> > > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > > on the tree?
> > > > >
> > > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > > case you are looking at.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > > data"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > > >  |
> > > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > > >        |
> > > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > > >             |
> > > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > > >    |
> > > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > > ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > > -
> > > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > > lot
> > > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > > sense on
> > > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > > render
> > > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.

Martin: I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I will shortly.
 Are you going to be at Apache Con this year?  If so we can discuss
some of your ideas in person as well.

Sean

On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
> which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
> is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
> work.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > hi Arash,
> >
> > sure your feedback is welcome :)
> >
> > like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> > During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Mattias,
> > >
> > > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > > one of the following purposes:
> > >
> > > 1) selecting one item
> > >  2) selecting multiple item
> > >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > > directory services, etc)
> > >
> > >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > > under debate.
> > >
> > > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> > >
> > >  1) simplifying development
> > >  2) simplifying learning for users
> > >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > Arash
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > > component".
> > > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > > on the tree?
> > > >
> > > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > > case you are looking at.
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > > >
> > > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > >
> > > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > > data"
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIComponent
> > > > > >  |
> > > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > > >        |
> > > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > > >             |
> > > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > > >    |
> > > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > > >    |
> > > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > > -
> > > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > > could
> > > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > > nodes.
> > > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > > somewhat
> > > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > > a
> > > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > > should
> > > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > > lot
> > > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > > the
> > > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > > attribute to
> > > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > > appropriate
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > > sense on
> > > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > > of
> > > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > > of
> > > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > > the
> > > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > > render
> > > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Well, it wouldn't be a problem to have an extended version of the tree
which implements EditableValueHolder, but not if the model of the tree
is configured by setting the value-attribute - then extending won't
work.

regards,

Martin

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> hi Arash,
>
> sure your feedback is welcome :)
>
> like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
> During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.
>
> -M
>
> On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello Mattias,
> >
> > I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> > think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> > displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> > one of the following purposes:
> >
> > 1) selecting one item
> >  2) selecting multiple item
> >  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> > directory services, etc)
> >
> >  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> > under debate.
> >
> > May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> > components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> > parent of all these components can have following benefits:
> >
> >  1) simplifying development
> >  2) simplifying learning for users
> >  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Arash
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> > component".
> > > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > > on the tree?
> > >
> > > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > > case you are looking at.
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Matthias,
> > > >
> > > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > >
> > > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> > data"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > > >
> > > > > UIComponent
> > > > >  |
> > > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > > >        |
> > > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > > >             |
> > > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > > >
> > > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > > >
> > > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > > >    |
> > > > >    + UIXTree
> > > > >
> > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > > UIXIterator
> > > > >    |
> > > > >    + UIXTable
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> > ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > -Matthias
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> > -
> > > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> > could
> > > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> > nodes.
> > > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> > somewhat
> > > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> > a
> > > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> > should
> > > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> > lot
> > > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> > the
> > > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> > attribute to
> > > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> > appropriate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> > sense on
> > > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> > value-attribute
> > > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> > of
> > > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> > of
> > > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> > HTML-bases
> > > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> > the
> > > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> > node-type), and
> > > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> > render
> > > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

hi Arash,

sure your feedback is welcome :)

like said before, a "generic" raw version + aditional tree stuff.
During that task we should also take a look at tree / treeTable, IMHO.

-M

On 10/5/06, Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello Mattias,
>
> I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
> think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
> displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
> one of the following purposes:
>
> 1) selecting one item
>  2) selecting multiple item
>  3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
> directory services, etc)
>
>  the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
> under debate.
>
> May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
> components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
> parent of all these components can have following benefits:
>
>  1) simplifying development
>  2) simplifying learning for users
>  3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand
>
> Best regards
>
> Arash
>
>
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> component".
> > What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> > on the tree?
> >
> > maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> > case you are looking at.
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Matthias,
> > >
> > > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > >
> > > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> data"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > > "var" on those tags.
> > > >
> > > > UIComponent
> > > >  |
> > > >  + - UIXComponent
> > > >        |
> > > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > > >             |
> > > >             + UIXCollection
> > > >
> > > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > > >
> > > > UIXHierarchy
> > > >    |
> > > >    + UIXTree
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > UIXIterator
> > > >    |
> > > >    + UIXTable
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > > by the Trin Table.
> > > >
> > > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > -Matthias
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi *,
> > > > >
> > > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> -
> > > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi M-
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek < martin.marinschek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> could
> > > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> nodes.
> > > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> somewhat
> > > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> a
> > > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> should
> > > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> lot
> > > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> the
> > > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> attribute to
> > > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> appropriate
> > > > > >
> > > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> sense on
> > > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> value-attribute
> > > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> of
> > > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> of
> > > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> HTML-bases
> > > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> the
> > > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> node-type), and
> > > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> render
> > > > > > on the client side?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com>.

Hello Mattias,

I am so new to this list and may be I am not allowed to say this, but I
think most developers I have seen use menu related components for only
displaying structured data, and most of times data is displayed to user for
one of the following purposes:

1) selecting one item
2) selecting multiple item
3) displaying and editing tree structured data (like organization chart,
directory services, etc)

the first 2 options are currently supported features of tree2, the 3'rd is
under debate.

May be if we can use same parent for both menu and tree navigation related
components and simple tree data structure as said by matias and zubin, for
parent of all these components can have following benefits:

1) simplifying development
2) simplifying learning for users
3) making it easier to add more advanced trees later on demand

Best regards

Arash

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input
> component".
> What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
> on the tree?
>
> maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
> case you are looking at.
>
> On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Matthias,
> >
> > for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> > be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> > data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> > RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> > whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> >
> > So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> > it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input
> data"
> > >
> > >
> > > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > > "var" on those tags.
> > >
> > > UIComponent
> > >  |
> > >  + - UIXComponent
> > >        |
> > >        + - UIXComponentBase
> > >             |
> > >             + UIXCollection
> > >
> > > Collection has some subclasses like
> > >
> > > UIXHierarchy
> > >    |
> > >    + UIXTree
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > UIXIterator
> > >    |
> > >    + UIXTable
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > > by the Trin Table.
> > >
> > > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder
> ?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi *,
> > > >
> > > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do
> -
> > > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > > >
> > > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > > UIXCollection interface?
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > Hi M-
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi *,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we
> could
> > > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected
> nodes.
> > > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is
> somewhat
> > > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be
> a
> > > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree
> should
> > > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a
> lot
> > > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad
> the
> > > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > > UIXTable.
> > > > >
> > > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value"
> attribute to
> > > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more
> appropriate
> > > > >
> > > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes
> sense on
> > > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > > >
> > > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the
> value-attribute
> > > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > > >
> > > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value"
> of
> > > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup
> of
> > > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large
> HTML-bases
> > > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer
> the
> > > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each
> node-type), and
> > > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > > >
> > > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to
> render
> > > > > on the client side?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Matthias
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > > >
> > > > > further stuff:
> > > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

I think a tree should "display" structured data and not be an "input component".
What should the input be? So you are willing register also validators
on the tree?

maybe that is more "specialized" use case instead a "generic" tree use
case you are looking at.

On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
> be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
> data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
> RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
> whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
>
> So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
> it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input data"
> >
> >
> > The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> > "var" on those tags.
> >
> > UIComponent
> >  |
> >  + - UIXComponent
> >        |
> >        + - UIXComponentBase
> >             |
> >             + UIXCollection
> >
> > Collection has some subclasses like
> >
> > UIXHierarchy
> >    |
> >    + UIXTree
> >
> > and
> >
> > UIXIterator
> >    |
> >    + UIXTable
> >
> >
> >
> > The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> > (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> > by the Trin Table.
> >
> > But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder ?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi *,
> > >
> > > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > > first thing I'm looking at.
> > >
> > > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do -
> > > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > > sense for a dynamic tree.
> > >
> > > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > > UIXCollection interface?
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Hi M-
> > > >
> > > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi *,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > > >
> > > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > > >
> > > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
> > > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > > UIXTable.
> > > >
> > > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> > > >
> > > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
> > > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > > >
> > > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > > > > are generally quite different).
> > > >
> > > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
> > > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > > >
> > > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
> > > > on the client side?
> > > >
> > > > -Matthias
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > > >
> > > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > > Courses in English and German
> > > > >
> > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > > >
> > > > further stuff:
> > > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Hi Matthias,

for the reason that every component that has changing values needs to
be an editable value holder. Imagine the case of a tree embedded in a
data-table - a data-table, at least the ones of both MyFaces and the
RI (I know, Trinidad's data-table does something different) only save
whatever is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.

So the selection model of a tree won't be saved in a dataTable, except
it is part of the EditableValueHolder interface.

regards,

Martin

On 10/5/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input data"
>
>
> The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
> "var" on those tags.
>
> UIComponent
>  |
>  + - UIXComponent
>        |
>        + - UIXComponentBase
>             |
>             + UIXCollection
>
> Collection has some subclasses like
>
> UIXHierarchy
>    |
>    + UIXTree
>
> and
>
> UIXIterator
>    |
>    + UIXTable
>
>
>
> The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
> (Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
> by the Trin Table.
>
> But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder ?
>
> Thanks!
> -Matthias
>
> On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi *,
> >
> > yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> > first thing I'm looking at.
> >
> > I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do -
> > UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> > sense for a dynamic tree.
> >
> > What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> > UIXCollection interface?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi M-
> > >
> > > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi *,
> > > >
> > > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > > >
> > > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> > >
> > > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
> > > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > > UIXTable.
> > >
> > > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> > >
> > >
> > > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> > >
> > > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
> > > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> > >
> > > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > > > are generally quite different).
> > >
> > > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
> > > (edit.)value:_holders
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> > >
> > > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
> > > on the client side?
> > >
> > > -Matthias
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > http://www.irian.at
> > > >
> > > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > > Courses in English and German
> > > >
> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

I think a tree is much more about "sturctured" data instead of "input data"


The UIXCollection is a base clazz for the "stamping", that you can say
"var" on those tags.

UIComponent
 |
 + - UIXComponent
       |
       + - UIXComponentBase
            |
            + UIXCollection

Collection has some subclasses like

UIXHierarchy
   |
   + UIXTree

and

UIXIterator
   |
   + UIXTable



The Trinidad Tree uses a "TreeModel" which extends CollectionModel
(Trin) which extends DataModel (Faces). CollectionModel is also used
by the Trin Table.

But, I am not really sure, why the table should be EditableValueHolder ?

Thanks!
-Matthias

On 10/5/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
> first thing I'm looking at.
>
> I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do -
> UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
> sense for a dynamic tree.
>
> What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
> UIXCollection interface?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi M-
> >
> > On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi *,
> > >
> > > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> > >
> > > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > > more with the values of the tree as well.
> >
> > I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
> > Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> > UIXTable.
> >
> > I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> > should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
> >
> >
> > > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> >
> > nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
> > (editable)valueHolders to me...
> > (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
> >
> > > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > > are generally quite different).
> >
> > I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
> > (edit.)value:_holders
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> >
> > you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
> > on the client side?
> >
> > -Matthias
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > http://www.irian.at
> > >
> > > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > > Courses in English and German
> > >
> > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com>.

Hi *,

yes, I'd also like to do an Ajaxified version, but that's not the
first thing I'm looking at.

I believe that extending from UIData is not really what we should do -
UIData is totally row-based, and a row-index doesn't make so much
sense for a dynamic tree.

What are the tree and the table of trinidad sharing with the
UIXCollection interface?

regards,

Martin

On 10/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi M-
>
> On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi *,
> >
> > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> >
> > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > more with the values of the tree as well.
>
> I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
> Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
> UIXTable.
>
> I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
> should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)
>
>
> > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
>
> nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
> (editable)valueHolders to me...
> (like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)
>
> > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > are generally quite different).
>
> I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
> (edit.)value:_holders
>
>
> >
> > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
>
> you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
> on the client side?
>
> -Matthias
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>


-- 

http://www.irian.at

Your JSF powerhouse -
JSF Consulting, Development and
Courses in English and German

Professional Support for Apache MyFaces

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

Hi M-

On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> have a discussion about some of the concepts.
>
> First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> more with the values of the tree as well.

I am not really sure about the EditableValueHolder. In Trinidad the
Tree (UIXTree) is type of UIXCollection, which is also used by
UIXTable.

I remember some discussions from Sean in the past that they Tree2
should extend UIData instead of UIComponent(Base)


> The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate

nothing wrong w/ using model instead of value, since value makes sense on
(editable)valueHolders to me...
(like UIOutput, UIInput, UISelect*,...)

> anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> are generally quite different).

I guess they just simply introduced that since there was a "value" of
(edit.)value:_holders


>
> Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> then render the nodes on the client dynamically.

you mean sending "xml" to the client and using a JS_engine to render
on the client side?

-Matthias
>
> Thoughts?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.

> would you please also consider adding an Ajax capability to Tree2 ?
> (beside server mode and client mode)

there is a cool post from Rick Hightower how to use dojo and tree2 (or
was it tree)

-Matthias


> regards
>
>
> On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi *,
> >
> > I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> > have a discussion about some of the concepts.
> >
> > First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> > Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> > ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> > list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> > implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> > more with the values of the tree as well.
> >
> > The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> > some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> > anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> > "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> > are generally quite different).
> >
> > Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> > the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> > result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> > data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> > then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.irian.at
> >
> > Your JSF powerhouse -
> > JSF Consulting, Development and
> > Courses in English and German
> >
> > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Arash Rajaeeyan


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Tree2

Posted by Arash Rajaeeyan <ar...@gmail.com>.

Dear Martin

I think for most people its easier to use list of values as selection model
of the tree.

would you please also consider adding an Ajax capability to Tree2 ?
(beside server mode and client mode)

regards

On 10/4/06, Martin Marinschek <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi *,
>
> I'm reviewing the tree2 currently, and I was wondering if we could
> have a discussion about some of the concepts.
>
> First thing I'd like to discuss is what happens with selected nodes.
> Currently, selecting a node fires an action-listener. This is somewhat
> ok, but I believe the selection-model of a tree should rather be a
> list of values, stored at a useful place. Therefore, the tree should
> implement the EditableValueHolder-interface, then we could do a lot
> more with the values of the tree as well.
>
> The change would necessitate to move the current "value" attribute to
> some other name - I suppose the name "model" would be more appropriate
> anyways (I've never understood why a dataTable has a
> "value"-attribute, by the way, the semantics for the value-attribute
> are generally quite different).
>
> Additionally, the tree is doing a lot with respect to the markup of
> the component. I'm not sure if this is useful as very large HTML-bases
> result from this. I suspect it would be better to only transfer the
> data-model to the client (and maybe templates for each node-type), and
> then render the nodes on the client dynamically.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> regards,
>
> Martin
>
> --
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>



-- 
Arash Rajaeeyan