Ikael
August 11th, 2014, 08:45
When developing IZ extension for SW I noticed that it really matters what style you use to define your controls. For instance in SW there is template called textlistitemnumber which defines frames as following:
<frame>
<name>textline</name>
</frame>
when using this template I must use the same way to define frame and I cannot use CoreRPG way:
<frame name="textlinesmall" /> because it is not taken account for reason or another. I can only override it by including frame element as
<frame>
<name>textlinesmall</name>
</frame>
I know both presentations are different in terms of XML but if FG engine is interpreting them as the same thing generally (you can use any style you like) then I see consistency issue here becuase now developer must know how template was defined and use the same style. This is minor issue, but to prevent unecessary why-this-does-not-work I would like to see that FG engine could understand this issues and could interpret outcome which does not depend on style you used.
<frame>
<name>textline</name>
</frame>
when using this template I must use the same way to define frame and I cannot use CoreRPG way:
<frame name="textlinesmall" /> because it is not taken account for reason or another. I can only override it by including frame element as
<frame>
<name>textlinesmall</name>
</frame>
I know both presentations are different in terms of XML but if FG engine is interpreting them as the same thing generally (you can use any style you like) then I see consistency issue here becuase now developer must know how template was defined and use the same style. This is minor issue, but to prevent unecessary why-this-does-not-work I would like to see that FG engine could understand this issues and could interpret outcome which does not depend on style you used.