On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 21:17:55 GMT, John Hendrikx <jhendr...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> This change modifies `ScrollPaneBehavior` to only consume keys that are 
> targetted at it.  As `KeyEvent`s are in almost all cases only intended for 
> the targetted node (as visually that's where the user expects the keyboard 
> input to go, as per normal UI rules) consuming key events that bubble up is 
> simply incorrect.  When the `ScrollPane` is focused directly (it has the 
> focused border) then it is fine for it to respond to all kinds of keys.
> 
> In FX controls normally there is no need to check if a `Control` is focused 
> (although they probably should **all** do this) as they do not have children 
> that could have received the Key Events involved, and Key Events are always 
> sent to the focused Node.  When `ScrollPane` was developed this was not taken 
> into account, leading to it consuming keys not intended for it.
> 
> This fixes several unexpected problems for custom control builders.  A custom 
> control normally benefits from standard navigation out of the box 
> (TAB/shift+TAB) and directional keys.  However, this breaks down as soon as 
> this custom control is positioned within a `ScrollPane`, which is very 
> surprising behavior and not at all expected.  This makes it harder than 
> needed for custom control developers to get the standard navigation for the 
> directional keys, as they would have to specifically capture those keys 
> before they reach the `ScrollPane` and trigger the correct navigation action 
> themselves (for which as of this writing there is no public API).
> 
> The same goes for all the other keys captured by `ScrollPane` when it does 
> not have focus, although not as critical as the UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT keys.

I do not see much behavioral difference between controls inside a regular VBox 
and VBox inside a ScrollPane

https://github.com/andy-goryachev-oracle/Test/blob/main/src/goryachev/research/FocusPolicyResearch.java

Am I doing things wrong?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1582#issuecomment-2383660184

Reply via email to