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

ino-control-item: Use slots instead of components #369

Open
janivo opened this issue May 10, 2021 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1154
Open

ino-control-item: Use slots instead of components #369

janivo opened this issue May 10, 2021 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1154
Labels
breaking change This issue introduces changes need to be made by the consumer
Milestone

Comments

@janivo
Copy link
Collaborator

janivo commented May 10, 2021

We are currently moving away from using our components inside each other and instead provide slots for such cases (see #188 and #222).
This way we don't have to mirror the API of the component used in it and make it more flexible for the consumer as they have full access to the API of the slotted component.

This also applies to the ino-control-item where we are using the ino-list-item.

There are two possible solutions to this:

  1. Provide Slots inside the ino-list-item where the consumer can provide a checkbox or a radio button and move the logic from the ino-control-item to the ino-list-item. This would make the ino-control-item obsolete.

See also #522

@silentHoo silentHoo added breaking change This issue introduces changes need to be made by the consumer est-medium labels Jun 2, 2021
@janivo janivo removed the est-medium label May 24, 2022
@pfecht pfecht added this to the Housekeeping milestone Jun 22, 2022
@iandi09 iandi09 self-assigned this Jan 2, 2024
@iandi09 iandi09 removed their assignment Jan 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking change This issue introduces changes need to be made by the consumer
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants