Bug 119083 - [TabbedProperties] support IGotoMarker in the properties framework
Summary: [TabbedProperties] support IGotoMarker in the properties framework
Status: REOPENED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.2   Edit
Hardware: PC All
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Anthony Hunter CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-12-02 14:21 EST by Rodrigo Peretti CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:04 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Rodrigo Peretti CLA 2005-12-02 14:21:52 EST
An important item on our list is gotoMarker() support. In order to support gotoMarker() in our graphical editor, we often cause an item in our editor to be selected, which causes the appropriate property sections to be displayed in the properties view, but after that, there is some work required to ensure the correct tab is visible and the correct widget on that page gets focus, for example. Some of this is a bit hairy currently since it's hard to query for the complete set of visible tabs/sections, and some simple additional API would make this much easier for us.
Comment 1 Chuck Bridgham CLA 2005-12-02 14:38:39 EST
Do these belong to you? Forward as necessary.

Thanks,
Comment 2 Anthony Hunter CLA 2007-07-19 10:47:45 EDT
Correct me if I am wrong, but why is this not a duplicate of Bug 119085 ?

You say your gotoMarker() selects elements in the graphical editor, which displays tabs and sections.

Now you want to make use of a proposed active tab and section setter to bring the UI you need into focus.
Comment 3 Rodrigo Peretti CLA 2007-07-19 13:23:00 EDT
Well, this one might depend on the other but does not really mean it is a duplicate. If you make it a duplicate it means everyone using the properties framework will need to implement goto marker in some way but if the basis is already in the framework, it means less code for everyone else to implement.
Comment 4 Anthony Hunter CLA 2007-07-19 13:59:38 EDT
OK, so if the tabbed properties view implements IGoToMarker, what is your propsal for the IMarker ?

 
Comment 5 Mike Wilson CLA 2008-05-13 12:39:40 EDT
The last entry on this bug was a question for the reporter. Is this request no longer useful, or is there some other reason why the conversation stopped?
Comment 6 Rodrigo Peretti CLA 2008-05-13 13:07:18 EDT
It would still be very useful.

Basically the view should handle IGotoMarker but every page would need to contribute some kind of logic that identifies if the marker belongs to it or not. The framework then would give focus to the first page that says so (maybe by delegating the gotoMarker() call to that particular page.
Comment 7 Anthony Hunter CLA 2008-05-13 13:45:33 EDT
This feature was on an IBM internal list for 3.4. No further follow up occurred since July 2007. 
Comment 8 Rodrigo Peretti CLA 2008-05-13 14:06:42 EDT
It would still be useful.
Comment 9 Anthony Hunter CLA 2008-06-05 23:49:27 EDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> Correct me if I am wrong, but why is this not a duplicate of Bug 119085 ?
> 
> You say your gotoMarker() selects elements in the graphical editor, which
> displays tabs and sections.
> 
> Now you want to make use of a proposed active tab and section setter to bring
> the UI you need into focus.
> 

I am back to why a view needs to provide an implementation for IGotoMarker . Clearly it is the editor which implements IGotoMarker and it will need to reveal the tabs and sections in the properties view. This would be solved by Bug 119085 .

And there is no reason why you cannot extend TabbedPropertySheetPage and make it implement IGotoMarker . Right?

Why does the framework *have* to provide an implementation for IGotoMarker?

 
Comment 10 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:04:52 EDT
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.