Collapse All not working in schema Design mode?

Having trouble installing <oXygen/>? Got a bug to report? Post it all here.
EarlMorton
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:27 pm

Collapse All not working in schema Design mode?

Post by EarlMorton » Fri Jan 18, 2019 6:55 pm

I am tinkering with the Design mode while studying a complex set of XML schemas. (I'm a text-oriented person, so graphical representations generally don't help me very much, so I haven't used it very much in the past.) The Collapse All command on the right-click menu doesn't seem to be working as described in the online Help. The Help says that this command "Recursively collapses all sub-components of the selected component." However, after using Collapse All, and then clicking the plus sign to expand an element, that element's tree often opens back up with several levels showing. (The one I'm looking at opened four sublevels.) I believe that "recursively" collapsing the sub-components should mean that only one level of sub-components should expand when I subsequently click a plus sign.

I've wondered if it matters what element you right-click on to choose the Collapse All command, or what part of the element symbol, but it doesn't seem to. I've tried right-clicking on the plus sign, on the element boxes, on the white space around the diagram, and so on. It doesn't seem to make a difference.

Also, the depth that the tree reopens to doesn't seem to be consistent across schema modules. Another one I just tried opened only two levels, even though it has several more.

Am I misunderstanding how this works, or is it not working correctly?

Thanks!

adrian
Posts: 2530
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 4:01 pm

Re: Collapse All not working in schema Design mode?

Post by adrian » Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:18 pm

Hi,
However, after using Collapse All, and then clicking the plus sign to expand an element, that element's tree often opens back up with several levels showing. (The one I'm looking at opened four sublevels.) I believe that "recursively" collapsing the sub-components should mean that only one level of sub-components should expand when I subsequently click a plus sign.
Collapse All should indeed collapse all children recursively.
1. What version of Oxygen are you using?
2. In what context (on what type of component) are you invoking "Collapse All". Collapse All on an element will collapse only that element and its children. Collapse All on the Schema should collapse everything.
3. Is there a public example where you have encountered this? I cannot find an example where this happens.
I've tested on Oxygen\frameworks\xhtml11\schema\xhtml11-modules-1.xsd .

Regards,
Adrian
Adrian Buza
<oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger
http://www.oxygenxml.com

EarlMorton
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:27 pm

Re: Collapse All not working in schema Design mode?

Post by EarlMorton » Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:45 pm

Thanks, Adrian!

To answer your questions:

1. I have oXygen XML Editor version 20.1, build 2018101517.

2. I have tried several, including the schema.

3. Oxygen XML Editor 20\frameworks\ooxml\schemas\xsd\wml.xsd demonstrates what I'm seeing. (Good idea to use the schemas that come with oXygen for demonstration!)

But I think I see what is happening, and how I'm interpreting (or misinterpreting) it.

In Design Mode, after choosing Collapse All on the schema, click the plus sign on the group EG_PContentMath. A lot of stuff opens up, more than will fit in the height of my screen. In this case there are four levels of nested <xsd:choice> statements that all open up until it finds element declarations under them. That's what was overwhelming me as I tried to drill down into the structure.

If you manually collapse each of those <xsd:choice> statements all the way back to the EG_PContentMath group, and then start clicking each plus sign, it opens each <xsd:choice> one at a time. This is what I was expecting (and desiring), because it lets me see the structure unfold more gradually, which is easier for me to visualize and understand.

<xsd:sequence>, of course, behaves the same way, as does any combination of nested <xsd:choice> and <xsd:sequence> statements.

I'm guessing that it is behaving as designed. I have no idea if other users would prefer it to behave more like what I would, so you will need to decide if it is worth investigating a change to the design.

Earl

Post Reply