From: Robert R. <rra...@ya...> - 2001-01-26 19:13:50
|
Yes, I like the way you collected the common properties of both and combined them. It makes the dynlayer and dyndocument much more friendlier to work with. Also, I think that the Netscape 6 problems need to be the highest priority right now. I know there have been fixes to the events. But one of the major problems is with the getContentW/H since NS 6 is a peice of crap, and doesn't initialize these offsetW/Height until it wants to. -- // Robert Rainwater On 1/26/2001, 2:49:53 AM EST, Pascal wrote about "[Dynapi-Dev] getDocument": > Now that the release is finished, I think we should change the object model > of the dynapi abit. > I want to make the same changes as done in dynacore, making a dynobject off > which the dyndocument and dynlayer are based. This makes things slightly > smaller and also easier to maintain (all parent-child stuff is controlled > in the DynObject and updating that will make the DynLayer and DynDocument > work the same with one single change) > Also dyndocuments should be added to the dynapi, this makes a better > object-tree available.. the DynAPI object will then contain child objects > (dyndocuments) and this also means that all layers created can be freeed > from the unLoad event of the DynAPI (simply walk thru all children of the > DynAPI object, and call deleteAllChildren()) > I also think the getdocument() is not needed anymore (seeing as I have > removed it from dynacore, and everything works) > the findLayers() extension should be a method of the DynDocument, not the > DynAPI object.. this looks more logicall: > DynAPI.document.findLayers() > The eventMethod should be possible to combine into one for DynLayer and > DynDocument, so that it can be attached to the DynObject (I've done this > already, but I think some small bugs for document-events are still > happening). > any ideas, comments,rocks? > Pascal Bestebroer (pb...@oi...) > Software ontwikkelaar > Oberon Informatiesystemen b.v. > http://www.oibv.com >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >> Van: dyn...@li... >> [mailto:dyn...@li...]Namens Robert Rainwater >> Verzonden: vrijdag 26 januari 2001 2:46 >> Aan: DynAPI Development List >> Onderwerp: [Dynapi-Dev] getDocument >> >> >> >> I was wondering if it would be better to move DynAPI.getDocument() to >> DynDocument.getDocument(). It seems more logical that getDocument >> belongs to DynDocument. Of course DynAPI.getDocument could be kept >> for a while too. >> >> -- >> // Robert Rainwater >> ---------------------- >> DynAPI Snapshots: http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/snapshot/ >> DynAPI Homepage: http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dynapi-Dev mailing list >> Dyn...@li... >> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > Dyn...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev ---------------------- DynAPI Snapshots: http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/snapshot/ DynAPI Homepage: http://dynapi.sourceforge.net/ |