Re: [wtp-dev] XML/SSE improvements

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Newsgroup would be better ... but for
you Max, :)  I'll address some of your question here. 

If I was you, I would not change your
"towards production I-builds" yet, if that's what you meant ...

when M9 is declared would be a better
time. 

But, you should have a developers workspace
with recent I-build as target, and evaluate what it would take 
to migrate, and if current functionality
suits your needs. 

For example, StructuredXMLEditor doesn't exist any
more ... I assume you meant 
StructuredTextEditor ... but, read the javadoc closely
... "not intended to 
be subclassed". If we can get wsdlTextEditor
and xsdTextEditor to continue 
their clean up, as we plan to do, I'd even propose
making it 
final and its protected methods private, to avoid
confusion over 
the "do not subclass" part of the API. Please
provide feedback if the 
provided configuration extension points do not suit
your needs. 
(The goal is to allow extension by extension points,
not subclassing, since
its easier to evolve in the future). 

Not sure which extension point you meant, but most
are name stable. 
BTW, there *are* settings you can set to get the plugin.xml
errors "to complain"
(not as good as Java Compiler, mind you, but pretty
good). 

The "content assist extension points" will
not be in 1.0. We'll be 
(looking at) following the platform's lead in this
area (and they 
are planning to "push down" content assist
participants for 3.2.).

"Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

10/31/2005 03:34 AM

Please respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."

To	wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject	[wtp-dev] XML/SSE improvements

Hi,

(Not sure if this is best in the newsgroup or here, but just kick me if
 
its better for the newsgroup)

I'm in the grey zone at the moment since I have to figure out when I want
 
to move
my plugin code from WTP 0.7 to WTP 1.0.

As it stands I can see that the StructuredXMLEditor's api have been made
 
more public and that is good.
The question is - is that API considered stable at the moment ? Mainly
if  
the extension points name
and semantics are in place ? (api changes are easy to catch by the  
compiler, but the xml in plugin.xml does
not complain if the extension point doesnt exist so damn hard to track
 
down ;)

Another thing is the quality of the code completion in XML (see  
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=89811)
which basically makes it very hard to create a valid xml file when writing
 
the code by hand; and that does not
need to be the case but as far as I can see in the WTP code I can't easily
 
customize the code completion rules
for XML yet. e.g. I need to order the inserts by relevance (or even remove
 
non-valid xml).

My question is if work have been done in this area with respect to WTP
1.0  
so I can actually get a real benefit
 from upgrading to WTP 1.0 ? (I don't need all the functionallity, just
the  
possibility to order the proposals
by validity and add required attributes/tag automatically to the inserted
 
text - and hopefully without using
internal API)

thanks
-- 
--
Max Rydahl Andersen
callto://max.rydahl.andersen

Hibernate
max@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://hibernate.org

JBoss Inc
max.andersen@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev