[Dojo-interest] Relation between widget and DOM

Karl Tiedt ktiedt at gmail.com
Thu Jun 19 13:07:59 EDT 2014


Well, I would question why you are preserving the dom? Seldom does a
widgets dom output really align with what another widget expects to
consume...

It sounds like you could just destroy the dom and not pass a node to the
tree constructor... but without better understanding your usage that is
hard to say.
On Jun 19, 2014 11:58 AM, "W.S. Hager" <wshager at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well I'm interested in the following: when destroying a widget but leaving
> the DOM node intact, would it be considered bad practice to create a new
> widget on the old DOM node?
>
> For instance, I want a Tree at the same place in the DOM where there had
> been a ContentPane (i.e. in the same LayoutContainer). The widget is
> destroyed, but the DOM stays intact:
> - removeChild is NOT called
> - the child is destroyed with preserveDom
> - the root node is emptied
> - the child is removed from the registry
> - a new child is instantiated with root node as its target
>
> I should think that there is no (formal) objection to doing that, right?
>
>
> 2014-06-19 18:42 GMT+02:00 Karl Tiedt <ktiedt at gmail.com>:
>
>> Well, it's hard to have a widget without dom... so I'd say it's a
>> relationship borne of necessity... widgets are visual enhancements
>> generally speaking and that requires dom...
>>
>> Not sure what else you could say about it...
>> On Jun 19, 2014 11:15 AM, "W.S. Hager" <wshager at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> No I meant does the relation have a formal basis like XBL, or was it
>>> just developed by some dojo developers.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-06-19 18:10 GMT+02:00 Karl Tiedt <ktiedt at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Generally speaking widgets extends the functionality of the dom node
>>>> they reference in some way... And often they replace that node with a more
>>>> complex template that comes from the widget to enable these enhanced
>>>> features.
>>>> On Jun 19, 2014 10:00 AM, "W.S. Hager" <wshager at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anybody tell me the (formal) relationship between widgets and the
>>>>> DOM? Is there any formal basis or did this simply emerge from
>>>>> implementation choices historically?
>>>>>
>>>>> How is this different in for instance web components?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Wouter
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dojo Toolkit: http://dojotoolkit.org/
>>>>> Tutorials: http://dojotoolkit.org/documentation/
>>>>>
>>>>> Dojo-interest at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, visit:
>>>>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dojo Toolkit: http://dojotoolkit.org/
>>>> Tutorials: http://dojotoolkit.org/documentation/
>>>>
>>>> Dojo-interest at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, visit:
>>>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> W.S. Hager
>>> Lagua Web Solutions
>>> http://lagua.nl
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dojo Toolkit: http://dojotoolkit.org/
>>> Tutorials: http://dojotoolkit.org/documentation/
>>>
>>> Dojo-interest at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>>> To unsubscribe, visit:
>>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Dojo Toolkit: http://dojotoolkit.org/
>> Tutorials: http://dojotoolkit.org/documentation/
>>
>> Dojo-interest at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> To unsubscribe, visit:
>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> W.S. Hager
> Lagua Web Solutions
> http://lagua.nl
>
> --
> Dojo Toolkit: http://dojotoolkit.org/
> Tutorials: http://dojotoolkit.org/documentation/
>
> Dojo-interest at mail.dojotoolkit.org
> To unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-interest
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-interest/attachments/20140619/bcdedcd2/attachment.htm 


More information about the Dojo-interest mailing list