22 Apr
2010
22 Apr
'10
2:58 p.m.
I'm ok with the highlight of the active filters. Active states are marked
with highlightColor. Even tags in the Tag Cloud, when active, are
highlighted with that color, also the table headers when they have an active
sorting.
What I don't understand is why you think you need to add another color to
the Color Theme class. If you think the color is too light then the client
should modify the color in his Color Theme to add more contrast with his
theme.
There is a process to enhance the actual Color Theme variables. There is a
page on incubator
http://incubator.myxwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/ColorThemesExtensi…
where is a proposal for a new Light Background Color and also a study of the
colors we would need for the Error/Notifications Messages.
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 14:20, Jerome Velociter <jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
color
Ok, I will adapt my implementation and the current code.
discusion
On Wed, Apr
21, 2010 at 12:35, Jerome Velociter <jerome(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
Hello Denis,
Well, since I have not followed what have been discuss regarding the Hi devs,
We have a customer request for highlighting the filters that are
currently
applied on a livetable. The rationale of this, is
that sometimes the
filtered table is empty or unexpected by the user, but he does not
notice
that a filter is currently applied. We have
written a proposed
implementation as well and you may also see what it looks like in the
attached screenshot, for both text field and select box (for webkit).
Currently, I choose yto use the "background highlight color" of the
active
color theme, but my feeling is that adding
another highlight color
would
be
better.
I agree theme, what would be the process to add a new
color in it ? How do we
expect
to manage the evolution of the color theme to avoid it to became
cluttered
?
I don't know either :)
Should we open a discussion on that if none have
been already ?
Caty, Sergiu ? Do we have a process defined for this ?
I have also hook to events separately from the "main" refresh handler,
because I do not understand the implementation of this handler. Why
using
an
intermediate makeRefreshHandler, and why it does not properly provide
the
currently changed filter to the handler ? Could
or should I change
that ?
Yes you can. The refresh handler should probably not return a function
but
be a livetable function that is bound as event listener, i.e :
this.handleRefresh.bindAsEventListener(this)
versus the current
this.makeRefreshHandler(this)
This way you will be able to access the event from the handler, thus the
filter that triggered it.
One last thing : you should not need the try {}
catch {} statements in
your code. I don't see where it could fail (and if it could, I think
it's
better to try to fix it so that it does not happen). Try catch blocks
IMO
should be used only in very specific occasions (for example when you
know
code can fail under certain circumstances, but you don't want to stop
the
execution). Anyway that's just my opinion, we've never stated on this as
a
best practice, but we can discuss it in another thread if needed. I'd be
curious to get input from Sergiu about this for example.
I agree. My habits was that minor JS function (those that do not impact
usability) should never ever crash, so I usually protect them with
try/catch
in all cases. This is maybe overkill here. Should we also open a on this best practice ? Sergiu ?
We already have some JS best practices documented at
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HJavaScr…
,
but it's probably about time we discuss again and expand those with new
ones. In addition of try/catch discussion, I can think of code style,
documentation style and preferred module pattern style.
Jerome
Denis
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs