<Beans Dev> Customizer question
Jeff.Dinkins at Sun.COM
Thu Nov 29 08:11:42 PST 2007
On Nov 29, 2007, at 8:06 AM, Laird Nelson wrote:
> Hello; I hope this is the right place to ask this question. I
> originally tried to ask it of the java-beans at java.sun.com email
> address--the address listed in the Java Beans specification as being
> appropriate for specification questions--but it bounced.
Hi Laird, sorry about the bounce -- we're working on fixing that now.
Hopefully one of the Beans engineer's can answer the below.
> Chet Haase referred me here.
> My question concerns Customizers (which must, as well, be
> Components) and the intention of the specification.
> The specification talks about Customizers being "full-fledged"
> editors that may be embedded in a java.awt.Panel or somehow placed
> into a java.awt.Window.
> It strikes me that the requirements for each of these cases are very
> different, but are not addressed by the specification.
> For example, suppose I have a PersonCustomizer that provides fields
> for first and last name. If I know in advance that this Component
> will be "embedded" in a Panel, then from a UI perspective I would
> not want to saddle it with an Apply button, or an OK button, or, for
> that matter, really any button at all.
> On the other hand, if somehow I know that my PersonCustomizer will
> be the only citizen of a Window, I very much would like it to have a
> system-appropriate button bar at the bottom (OK/Apply/Cancel/Help
> In both cases my Customizer would need to know when the user wants
> his changes to be applied. Obviously if I supply my own button bar,
> I can accomplish this. But in the "embedding" case, I may not want
> to do this. In such a case I might want to simply provide Actions
> (if my Customizer is also a JComponent), but it may not be a
> All of this leads me to believe that the original authors of the
> specification (Graham Hamilton et al.) had something in mind that
> wasn't committed to the specification.
> Perhaps, for example, they had in their heads that Customizer
> Components would always be the sole resident of a window supplied by
> the container. Or perhaps they assumed that at the very least
> Customizer Components would always provide their own apply/cancel
> mechanics (so it would not be a "violation", even in the embedding
> case, despite what the specification suggests, for a Customizer to
> be embedded into a Panel alongside other such Customizers with its
> own button bar).
> Now, NetBeans and if I recall correctly the old BeanBox and some
> other Customizer-aware containers actually do embed Customizers
> inside a Window of some kind (usually a JDialog ), but they also
> provide a "Done" button or something similar. That strikes me--no
> offense intended--as the worst possible move: now, even if my
> Customizer provides its own button bar to manage its commits and
> cancels, it looks stupid, because there's another button bar
> supplied by the container.
> What implicit assumptions were there when the specification was
> written? What implicit unspecified contract should Customizer
> Components adhere to? Should they provide their own button bars in
> all cases (i.e. is the "embedding in a panel" case just silly)? Or
> should they not provide their own button bars? (Note: "button bar"
> here is a stand-in for any visual component that provides the user a
> direct ability to apply or cancel changes.)
> What, if any, plans exist going forward to tighten this
> specification up a little? Will there be any...any...annotations or
> something to indicate to a container how a Customizer should be
> displayed? Perhaps some kind of convention (i.e. if the Customizer
> discovers that its parent has a Component named "buttonBar" then...)?
> One kind of Component is a Window. Is it understood (or not) that
> if the Customizer "is a" Window it will not need to be embedded in
> any way, shape or form?
> These issues can (and do) also apply to the custom editors returned
> by PropertyEditors . Is there any reason why any solution here
> would not reasonably apply to those cases as well?
> Thanks for your time,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the beans-dev