Community
Participate
Working Groups
The label of attribute editors should support an additional description as tooltip. Could be handled via the metadata. metaData.setLabel("a field"); metaData.setDescription("a field to enter something");
+1 This looks similar to bug 331154.
(In reply to comment #1) > +1 This looks similar to bug 331154. Yes, but bug#331154 only add this for the TaskOperation. Should I use this bug for adding this to the other Attribute Editors?
Created attachment 184538 [details] patch V1 Steffen, please verify my implementation. Thanks!
Created attachment 184539 [details] mylyn/context/zip
I wonder if it would make sense to add a getTooltip or getDescription to AbstractAttributeEditor to not go trough the whole taskattribute,metadata,metatooltip chain like it is already present for the label attribute.
Yes, please add a getDescription() method that encapsulates retrieval of the tooltip. Otherwise, please feel free to apply the patch.
(In reply to comment #6) > Yes, please add a getDescription() method that encapsulates retrieval of the > tooltip. Otherwise, please feel free to apply the patch. Yes I commit this soon, but for TaskEditorActionPart we need to use taskattribute,metadata,metatooltip chain
(In reply to comment #7) > Yes I commit this soon, but for TaskEditorActionPart we need to use > taskattribute,metadata,metatooltip chain Sounds fine.
Created attachment 185005 [details] patch V2 commited patch
Created attachment 185006 [details] mylyn/context/zip
What is the reason for making AbstractAttributeEditor.setDescription() private?
(In reply to comment #11) > What is the reason for making AbstractAttributeEditor.setDescription() private? Actual we need the set only in the Constructor. Should I change this to public?
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > What is the reason for making AbstractAttributeEditor.setDescription() > private? > > Actual we need the set only in the Constructor. Should I change this to public? Yes, please.
Looks like we are done here.