Comments on Chris O'Brien: Extending the web part framework - part 1

@Masti Masti, Yes, the completed project did refl...

2009-09-26T11:28:41.102+01:00

@Masti Masti,

Yes, the completed project did reflect the original client requirements quite closely.

Part 2 of this article can be found at http://www.sharepointnutsandbolts.com/2009/02/extending-web-part-framework-part-2.html.

HTH,

Chris.

Have you implemented the project at the client? If...

2009-09-25T23:28:01.275+01:00

Have you implemented the project at the client? If yes was the implementation as close to the requirements that business had laid out?

Are you planning to write the part II of this article?

Hi Nigel,

Sorry, only just noticed this com...

2009-02-20T17:36:00.000Z

Hi Nigel,

Sorry, only just noticed this comment. It was XHTML and we were mainly AA but A in a couple of places. The client's goal was A, but it actually wasn't a huge priority for them.

Cheers,

Chris.

Thanks Mads.

Re-reading the article, strike...

2009-02-12T21:12:00.000Z

Thanks Mads.

Re-reading the article, strikes me I did go a bit quiet on how we did that, think that paragraph slipped off the end ;-)

In brief it can be done by overriding the GetToolParts() method which returns an array of toolparts, and ensuring your custom toolpart is the only one in there. By default, SharePoint will the default toolpart to this collection.

Cheers,

Chris.

1. Excellent work. This is a good step towards sep...

2009-02-12T15:40:00.000Z

1. Excellent work. This is a good step towards separating between User Options and Admin options for webparts.
2. Probably a stupid question: what impl approach did you make use of to remove the Appearance etc. stuff from the toolpane?

Hi Chris
How accessible was the site in the end...

2009-02-06T10:00:00.000Z

Hi Chris
How accessible was the site in the end ?
was it XHTML and "AA" compliant?

Keep up the posts.

Nigel