Summary: | [Perspectives] [EditorMgmt] Allow preferred perspective(s) for specific editors | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | John Houston <jhouston.mail> |
Component: | UI | Assignee: | Platform UI Triaged <platform-ui-triaged> |
Status: | ASSIGNED --- | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P5 | CC: | douglas.pollock, eclipse |
Version: | 3.1 | Keywords: | helpwanted |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows XP | ||
Whiteboard: |
Description
John Houston
2005-09-07 11:32:14 EDT
I'm a bit confused by the above. There's currently no way of associating files or editors with perspectives. In the newWizards extension point, you can associate a preferred perspective (one or more, actually) with a new project wizard (e.g. create a Plug-in project, get prompted to switch to PDE perspective). Can you describe your scenario in more detail? Note that, in addition to the declarative expression language, there is the content types mechanism for mapping a file name and/or analysis of a file's content to a content type, which can then be mapped to editor type. XML files are the canonical example here. See the Content Types pref page under General. After looking again, you are right -- my comments are confusing. The scenario is: I import or create a Java file with meta data within the file that describes the file in more detail and when I open an editor for that file a suppressible dialog is shown with wording something like, "This type of file is best viewed with the XXXX perspective. Would you like to switch perspectives now?" In short, the ability to switch perspectives programatically should be added as an exit point when opening new editors. Thanks for clarifying. I'm rewording the summary accordingly. We have no plans to address this enhancement for 3.2. Reassigning bugs in component areas that are changing ownership. There are currently no plans to work on this feature. PW Changes requested on bug 193523 This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. |