Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 86357 - [Presentations] Add getAdapter() to IPresentablePart
Summary: [Presentations] Add getAdapter() to IPresentablePart
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.1   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Stefan Xenos CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-02-23 15:37 EST by Chris Gross CLA
Modified: 2005-03-31 10:35 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments
pic of presentation (89.68 KB, image/x-png)
2005-03-04 16:47 EST, Chris Gross CLA
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Chris Gross CLA 2005-02-23 15:37:42 EST
I've started working with the presentations API.  The needs of my presentation 
are greater than what is currently specified as part of the default 
presentation.  That is, I need more than the image, title, tooltip, etc.  In 
my presentation, each editor/view must have a header image, a content 
description and more.  In the current presentations API there is no way to 
manage any extra properties.  

If the IPresentablePart interface could expose the getAdapter() method of the 
underlying workbench part, then I could use that for any additional properties 
I need.
Comment 1 Chris Gross CLA 2005-03-04 16:47:39 EST
Created attachment 18468 [details]
pic of presentation

This picture shows my altered presentation and points out where/why I need an
extra property.  I need a 32x32 image that represents the object being edited. 
In the picture I am simply stretching the 16x16 default image to 32x32.  

I'm really hoping this change could be made for 3.1.
Comment 2 Stefan Xenos CLA 2005-03-28 15:01:20 EST
Implementing this enhancement as suggested would require eager activation of the
part. IPresentablePart is created long before the actual IWorkbenchPart. 

If any method on IWorkbenchPart were exposed directly by the IPresentablePart,
it would be necessary to force creation of the IWorkbenchPart... and that's bad.

It may be possible to give IPresentablePart a more open-ended API, but it would
be necessary to do so in a manner that did not force activation of the
underlying part.
Comment 3 Chris Gross CLA 2005-03-31 10:35:23 EST
Added 89834