You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There are a number of inconsistencies with naming in the current library. Some examples include <RaisedButton /> and <FlatButton /> vs <TextField /> and <TextField multiLine={true} />.
We should agree on some guidelines to answer the questions "When is a new property/feature on a component a new component?" and "What should this component be called?"
Some suggestions to trigger further discussion.
Formatting is a component concern, therefore <FlatButton /> and <RaisedButton /> should probably be combined. And the existence of <IconButton /> should be questioned.
Behaviour changes should often make new components.
a) TextField Multiline should be a different component as the number of lines, and autogrowth probably warrants separation. Most TextField uses won't need this functionality.
b) Also, <FloatingActionButton /> perhaps has different behaviour, (though we don't currently implement much of that) so should be a separate component.
c) <ListItem /> has nestedItems and children, which by proxy <MenuItem /> then has.
It would be nice to scope naming of similar components... I quite like <Progress.Linear />, and <Progress.Circular /> as the end product for users of material components. The implementation of this might be too hacky, so <LinearProgress /> vs <ProgressLinear /> should be considered. Also, should <DatePicker /> and <TimePicker /> fall under this categorisation like the material spec?
Material Design Spec has neither <DropDownMenu /> nor <SelectField /> nor <Badge /> nor <LeftNav />
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@chrismcv Thanks mate! Better than the issue I would have cooked up today ;)
100%
I agree, one of the problems with the current TextField that we all want to address (and we will revisit after 0.15 is that it feels as though you're bringing the entire kitchen sink with you for a simple input.
How do you do that scoping without attaching components as a static property on other components?
About the SelectField, I don't really understand the difference between SelectField and DropDownMenu in terms of "features" ?
Also, AutoComplete component is like a SelectField with auto-select feature... I've missed something ? Isn't it possible to make it an option/props of SelectField ?
We have done our best to improve the nomenclature on the v1-alpha branch. Most of the time, we try to the Material Design Specification nomenclature. If you find anything disturbing on that branch, please raise your voice before it's too late with the official release.
Derived from #3682
There are a number of inconsistencies with naming in the current library. Some examples include
<RaisedButton />
and<FlatButton />
vs<TextField />
and<TextField multiLine={true} />
.We should agree on some guidelines to answer the questions "When is a new property/feature on a component a new component?" and "What should this component be called?"
Some suggestions to trigger further discussion.
<FlatButton />
and<RaisedButton />
should probably be combined. And the existence of<IconButton />
should be questioned.a) TextField Multiline should be a different component as the number of lines, and autogrowth probably warrants separation. Most TextField uses won't need this functionality.
b) Also,
<FloatingActionButton />
perhaps has different behaviour, (though we don't currently implement much of that) so should be a separate component.c)
<ListItem />
hasnestedItems
andchildren
, which by proxy<MenuItem />
then has.<Progress.Linear />
, and<Progress.Circular />
as the end product for users of material components. The implementation of this might be too hacky, so<LinearProgress />
vs<ProgressLinear />
should be considered. Also, should<DatePicker />
and<TimePicker />
fall under this categorisation like the material spec?<DropDownMenu />
nor<SelectField />
nor<Badge />
nor<LeftNav />
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: