Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Combine all pickers into a single 'nuPicker' property editor #164

Open
Hendy opened this issue Apr 9, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Combine all pickers into a single 'nuPicker' property editor #164

Hendy opened this issue Apr 9, 2017 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@Hendy
Copy link
Contributor

Hendy commented Apr 9, 2017

Too much choice !

image

Each property editor combines shared code to define itself, so shouldn't be too difficult to have a new property editor that does this combining.

@Hendy Hendy added this to the v2.0.0 milestone Apr 15, 2017
@DanDiplo
Copy link

If you can't or don't want to do that I would suggest adding in the JSON .manifest file for each picker a group name, so they are grouped under the "nuPickers" group name in the property editor picker dialogue. See https://our.umbraco.org/Documentation/Tutorials/Creating-a-Property-Editor/

propertyEditors: [
        {
            /*this must be a unique alias*/
            alias: "My.MarkdownEditor",
            /*the name*/
            name: "My markdown editor",
            /*the icon*/
            icon: "icon-code",
            /*grouping for "Select editor" dialog*/
            group: "nuPickers",
            /*the HTML file we will load for the editor*/
            editor: {
                view: "~/App_Plugins/myeditor/editor.html"
            }
        }

@Hendy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hendy commented Apr 26, 2017

Thanks @DanDiplo, that would certainly help, but the thing is there are no .manifest files in nuPickers ! instead each property editor uses an attribute to make these settings (example) so I'm not sure how to make this change ?

I think for a v2.0.0 a single property editor would be good, as it'd also signify that all the existing datatypes are all interchangeable (and saves you having to remember settings when wanting to change a data-source or an editor).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants