A IBead can also be an Istrand. You just have to add the code to allow it.
However, it is also reasonable for the MaterialIcon bead to be on the same
strand as the DeletableChip bead. The MaterialIcon bead just has to find
the other bead. It could presume it is the View bead, or it could call
getBeadByType of some particular interface.
The advantage of not having beads in beads is that it makes it easier for
the consumer.
If you just have
<mdl:Chip />
It is more work to add the View bead in order to add the Icon bead:
<mdl:Chip>
<mdl:beads>
<mdl:DeletableChip>
<mdl:beads>
<mdl:MaterialIcons />
Instead of just:
<mdl:Chip>
<mdl:beads>
<mdl:MaterialIcons />
Also, since we allow specification of the view bead in CSS, it would be
nicer if the consumer didn't have to dictate the view bead just to add a
decoration bead.
Also note that a MatericalIcon bead might be better managed as a new kind
of bead I would call a "passive" bead. Instead of actually doing work to
alter the content in the view, the MaterialIcon might just want to notify
the view bead that it exists so the view bead can figure out how to deal
with the content carried by the "passive" bead.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 11/29/16, 11:04 AM, "piotrz" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Exactly!
>
>Look what we have now in the examples [1]. In theor Bead "MaterialIcons"
>have to decorate "DeletableChip" bead which contains this Button. So it is
>still question can we decorate Bead by other Bead ? Need to try. :)
>
>[1] https://paste.apache.org/TgGM
>
>Piotr
>
>
>
>
>-----
>Apache Flex PMC
>piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexJS-MDL-Add-icon-t
>o-DeletableChip-tp56766p56792.html
>Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
