Re: apimodel for element type

From: Mike Schrag (mschra..dimension.com)
Date: Wed Sep 07 2005 - 23:53:42 EDT

  • Next message: Ulrich Köster: "Re: exception explanation webapp"

    Yep that is correct (the first part at least :) ).

    ms

    On Sep 7, 2005, at 11:29 PM, Greg wrote:

    > I am pretty sure from looking at the source that the
    > ComponentEditior has the WODEditor and HTMLEditor in it.
    >
    > The mpe (MultiPageEditor) has the Java editor, Component editor and
    > ApiEditor in it.
    >
    > This stuff is really starting to rock. Mike and Uli are going to
    > get pretty drunk at next years wwdc as everyone will be buying them
    > beers! Keep up the great work guys.
    >
    > Greg
    >
    > On 08/09/2005, at 1:07 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote:
    >
    >
    >> What is the difference between the ComponentEditor and the
    >> WODEditor? Does
    >> the ComponentEditor use the WODEditor?
    >>
    >> Dov Rosenberg
    >>
    >>
    >> On 9/7/05 9:48 PM, "Mike Schrag" <mschra..dimension.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Is there a way to get an ApiModel for an Element Type (i.e.
    >>> "WOHyperlink", a component in a framework, or a component in your
    >>> project)? I want to add in API binding completion into WOD editor,
    >>> but I want to make sure I'm not duplicating effort with the lookup.
    >>>
    >>> I'm also about just about to check in the new Wod editor. Bunch of
    >>> misc changes:
    >>> * Refactored to be "WodEditor" (vs "WODEditor" to match Api naming)
    >>> * moved into subpackages (.wod.*)
    >>> * added a new WodModel that you can get from an IDocument with
    >>> WodModelUtils
    >>> * updated all your component editor stuff to use the new WodModel
    >>> instead of the misc wod parsing ,etc
    >>> * added in reconciler support for Wods, so syntax errors are caught
    >>> now (though it's not hooked into the builder, so they only show up
    >>> right now when you open a wod for the first time)
    >>>
    >>> Next up is:
    >>> * Element Type error checking (i.e. does the element type exist,
    >>> does
    >>> it extend the right class, etc)
    >>> * Unreferenced Element Name error checking (does the element
    >>> exist in
    >>> the HTML file) -- This probably should be a warning, since it's
    >>> technically legit to have an element name in a wod that does NOT
    >>> exist in html
    >>> * Missing Element Name error checking (does the html reference an
    >>> element that isn't defined)
    >>>
    >>> I would like to do binding checks, but those are actually impossible
    >>> to do I think. Any component can provide custom implementations of
    >>> KVC or if binding sync is off there may not be methods at all. I
    >>> believe I can validate bindings if you have an API file? Ulrich --
    >>> How hard would it to implement something that actually executes the
    >>> binding validations if I give you a dictionary of binding key/value
    >>> pairs? Not asking you to do it, rather checking to see how hard it
    >>> would be to do given your ApiModel?
    >>>
    >>> Oh one other thing -- I have some pretty hacky code in
    >>> WodCompletionProcessor that retrieves the list of element names
    >>> defined in <webobject name="xxx"> tags. Is there a cooler way to do
    >>> this just using your api's?
    >>>
    >>> ms
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Dov Rosenberg
    >> Inquira Inc
    >> 370 Centerpointe Circle, ste 1178
    >> Altamonte Springs, FL 32701
    >> (407) 339-1177 x 102
    >> (407) 339-6704 (fax)
    >> drosenber..nquira.com
    >> AOL IM: dovrosenberg
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Sep 07 2005 - 23:53:49 EDT