This project is read-only.

Remarks about implementation

Apr 12, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Hello guys,

I've just discovered your project while I was about to make it on my own, and I have some questions/remarks :

- why isn't it possible to declare our client functions inside inner tags of the control/extender (using the attribute PersistenceMode), which would help defining properties with multiple lines easily, and more "esthetic" ?
- why don't you define your own syntax for selecting server controls, thus you would not loose the possibilities offered by the selectors with jQuery, instead of talking about AssociatedControlId : .className, #clientId, $serverId, tagName.

This is what I did for my first extender, thus, I was not loosing the selector enhancement given by jQuery, and gave more when used with ASP.NET. 

Regards,
Nicolas Penin
Apr 14, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Edited Apr 15, 2009 at 1:20 AM
"- why don't you define your own syntax for selecting server controls, thus you would not loose the possibilities offered by the selectors with jQuery, instead of talking about AssociatedControlId : .className, #clientId, $serverId, tagName."

I love this idea.  I'm currently considering an attribute:

Selector="SELECTORQUERY"

for example:

<cc3:Draggable Cursor="crosshair" Revert="yes" ID="Draggable2" runat="server" Selector="#{Panel3}" />

or

<cc3:Draggable Cursor="crosshair" Revert="yes" ID="Draggable2" runat="server" jQuery=".ClassName" />


I will copy the contents of the SelectorAttribute and plug it into the $("...") bits behind the scenes and use {...} to denote server control ID's that need to be resolved to ClientID.s


This is included in the Beta 3 release.

 

 

 

Apr 15, 2009 at 1:22 AM
For your other point

- why isn't it possible to declare our client functions inside inner tags of the control/extender (using the attribute PersistenceMode), which would help defining properties with multiple lines easily, and more "esthetic" ?

I'm going to do some digging around this.  At first glance I like the idea, just need to find the time to convert/implement it.
Jun 5, 2009 at 8:46 AM

Concerning the client functions:

If you still need inspiration, I implemented this already in the jQUI-DNN integration package, which you can also find here on codeplex at http://jquidnn.codeplex.com/. Also, I believe the controls implemented so far have a more "ASP.NET"ty feel to them, e.g. the Datepicker offers a DateTime property and not just strings, the Tabs control maintains the active tab across postbacks, etc. So maybe, it might be an idea to work together on this. Don't get me wrong: I love your "low-level" implementation of the jQuery UI controls, since you can basically do everything with it. But I think most developers like to have more comfort while coding :-)

Best regards,
Christoph