Rectangle instead of BackgroundImage as scrollbar handle for a TableView?

DaWoo

Hi,

I am currently developing using Qt 5.1.1.

I need to implement a custom style for a "TableView". Thus I define a new TableViewStyle for my TableView including delegates: itemDelegate, headerDelegate, handle etc.

When defining the scrollbar handle delegate I tried first to define it as a simple Rectangle with a certain background color. This did not work, the scrollbar handle was not visible.
When i use Image or BackgroundImage all is fine. Can anybody explain to me why I can't use a Rectangle here?

Also, I had trouble to find good documentation concerning the TableViewStyle. I had to gather a lot of information from the code. Am I missing a source of documentation?

Some code for explanation:

@TableView {
model : id_dbaseLibModel
style : TableViewStyle
{
itemDelegate: id_itemDelegate
headerDelegate: id_headerDelegate
rowDelegate: id_rowDelegate

            minimumHandleLength: 20
            handleOverlap: 5

            /* not working: 
            handle:  Rectangle {
                width: 10;   
                color: "black"; 
            }
            */

            /* working fine: */
            handle:  Image
            {
                source: "/gfx/icons/naviOff.png"  // random image, temporary
            }

            decrementControl: Component { Rectangle{} }
            incrementControl: Component { Rectangle{} }

            scrollBarBackground : Rectangle { width: 10;  color: "green" }
        }

TableViewColumn{ ..... }
TableViewColumn{ ..... }

}
@

Thx
DaWoo

Torgeir

Hi,

I use this, and it works for me:
@
handle: Rectangle {
implicitWidth: 8
implicitHeight: 8
color: "black"
}
@

DaWoo

Hi Torgeir,

your handle definition works for me also. It seems to be important to define the implicitWidth of the handle instead of just the width.
From the documentation I understand that the implicitWidth of an item is 0 by default, wich would explain why the scrollbar handle (as i defined it) was not visible.

What I don't understand though: why is the "explicit" width ignored in this case?

Thanks
DaWoo