>Hi Viv,
>
>hmmm, What does this mean?
>
>> with WPF, you should never use base classes to impose any visual appearance on derived classes.

Well, put it this way: I can't think of any reason why you would do so when you can use Styles or Control Templates; hard-coding appearance by using a base class pretty much negates those benefits of XAML.....

TBH, since I work a lot with MVVM, I can't think of many reasons to define behaviour within the base class of a visual object either....