Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 363476 - graphiti.ecore should specify more defaults attributes values
Summary: graphiti.ecore should specify more defaults attributes values
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Graphiti
Classification: Modeling
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Version: 0.8.0   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P3 minor (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Project Inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-11-10 09:50 EST by Hernan Gonzalez CLA
Modified: 2011-11-11 09:06 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Hernan Gonzalez CLA 2011-11-10 09:50:20 EST 
Build Identifier: 

Diagram serialization could be ligther is some sensible defaults were defined in graphiti.ecore

In particular, I detect:

 AbstractStyle.transparency : "0.0"
 AbstractStyle.lineWidth "1" 
 PictogramElement.visible "true"
 PictogramElement.active "true"

I think this modification is backward compatible, no migration is necesary.
 
 

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Michael Wenz CLA 2011-11-11 04:04:54 EST 
We had a closed look at the defaults just recently in the discussions regarding the Style concept (see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=352542). There we found that we would really have to struggle with compatibility in this area if we change the default values and we decided not to go for them.
Because of this we have to accept (slightly) larger diagram files.
Comment 2 Hernan Gonzalez CLA 2011-11-11 09:06:17 EST 
Not a big deal to me, but I wish to point out that here I'm not proposing to CHANGE defaults, but to SET defaults for attributes that didn't have them. For example, "transparency" (which, I guess, in more than 99.9% cases will have a 0.0 value) currently have no default. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I can't imagine any example in which this change would introduce some compatibility problem or some appearance change for already existing code and diagrams.