Re: WOD Feedback

From: Mike Schrag (mschra..dimension.com)
Date: Thu Sep 15 2005 - 22:33:18 EDT

  • Next message: Greg: "Re: WOD Feedback"

    > Is it possible on the autocomplete to have the list show up like it
    > does in
    > WOBuilder? I.e. If the binding is a boolean have the choices be
    > "true" or
    > "false" or if a numberformatter is chosen present the dropdown of
    > the list
    > of format choices? I'm not sure where that information is kept.
    The .api file specifies this information I think. I'm just not using
    it yet ... baby steps :)

    > On the html tree it would be nice when the component name is
    > clicked that
    > the whole block that encloses the <WEBOBJECT NAME="xyz">......</
    > WEBOBJECT>
    > is highlighted in the HTML source and selected in the WOD. The
    > green bar is
    > OK in the WOD. Kind of like what happens when you find the matching
    > { or (
    > in the java editor. Not sure if that is easy or hard.
    Ulrich and I would have to pool our collective sk1lLz to do this :)
    We'll see ... File a request for enhancement if you would.

    > If I add a <webobject> tag using the autocomplete, does it (or
    > could it) add
    > the template into the WOD for me?
    Someone else requested this earlier today. The problem is when you
    add a webobject tag, the only information we know is the name, which
    means all we can do in the wod file is add:
    YourElementName : {
    }

    Which I personally would rather just complete using the completion
    key binding which would autofill in YourElementName anyway (assuming
    you just added a single new element name). Just my two cents on that
    one.

    > Is there a way under the Source menu (or some other context menu)
    > choice to
    > manually validate the WO component without having to build?
    Currently this isn't an option, though autobuilding is sort of The
    Eclipse Way (TM).

    > When I cleaned and built my code using build 2.0.0.47 I got a whole
    > bunch of
    > validation errors. Some were valid and have probably been in there
    > for years
    > without causing any noticeable problems. Maybe those ERRORS should
    > really be
    > warnings since it didn't cause me any real grief. Otherwise I have
    > a RED
    > flag on my icons that really doesn't stop the app from running.
    Can you give some examples of the validation errors that should be
    switched to warnings?

    ms



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 22:33:25 EDT