|
One of my Tools->Options OptionsPad is larger than the default reserved space (right of the Options tree). I'm thinking I want to resize the options pad area to fit the larger pad. Currently the pad shows as being half truncated on the right. I'm not sure how to resize. Alternatively, I can break down the options into separate sub-items. I hesitate to do that as they are logically related. Thinking out loud, maybe I should define an Initialize event using the pad's Xaml. In the Initialize event, I can find the parent Window, then adjust its Width and Height. ... More thinking ... maybe the best way to do this is to override the default OptionsDialog box. That would give me much more flexibility for resizing and also adding an Apply button. Is there a way to override without touching SoapBox source code? |
|
Version 2010.06.13 of SoapBox Core now allows you to override the OptionsDialogView window with your own. If you don't provide one, it still loads the default. Here's how to create your own customized OptionsDialogView window:
Then you can completely change the look and feel of the options dialog without affecting the functionality of it. This is working for me with a couple exceptions.
(17 Jun '10, 10:47)
BSalita
(17 Jun '10, 10:47)
BSalita
@BSalita: Good info, I'll look into it. Thanks!
(17 Jun '10, 12:36)
Scott Whitlock ♦♦
|
|
I don't really see a work-around at the moment. I have two options:
I guess I could always do both too... let me know which you prefer. |
|
Implementing 1., adding Width and Height, looks like it will resolve the main problem of resizing. There's still the lesser issue of adding an Apply button and who know what else. Maybe it would be better to do one of the following: Maybe the direction we need to go is to not provide a default Export for OptionsDialog. Then in your app, you create a concrete OptionsDialog that inherits from AbstractOptionsDialog. It will automatically use the default AbstractOptionsDialogView, unless you provide a new View for your concrete class.
(04 Jun '10, 12:23)
Scott Whitlock ♦♦
Right, that might be the most elegant answer.
(04 Jun '10, 13:02)
BSalita
|