I will once I have something materialized. All code snippets and thoughts right now, besides I'm still refactoring the code base.
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Jacques Le Roux < [email protected]> wrote: > Taher, > > Maybe you could share your ideas, and even work, in a Jira? > > Jacques > > > > Le 01/12/2016 à 10:53, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : > >> I am working on this >> >> On Dec 1, 2016 12:48 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Totally agreed! >>> >>> BTW Gareth Cater told me he did a work related to "custom-widget" (he >>> used >>> the same term but not sure it's the same thing). I'll try to contact him >>> about that. Has anybody else begun to work on that? >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> Le 01/12/2016 à 10:38, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>> >>> Hi Jacques, >>>> >>>> That was already discussed. My opinion is still not to allow it BUT, you >>>> can create a DSL for something, let's call it custom-widget. Then, all >>>> that >>>> you need to do to drop down to FTL is to create macros in the theme to >>>> implement your special widget. >>>> >>>> This way, you can maintain purity of the widgets while at the same time >>>> allowing you to muck with HTML. In a sense, we tell our developers, do >>>> whatever you want, OUTSIDE. So this custom-widget becomes the gateway to >>>> that. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> That would be good, I know we can do a lot with form widgets backed by >>>> js >>>> >>>>> scripts and I'm always been a form widgets enthusiast (if not fanatic >>>>> :D). >>>>> >>>>> But there should be also a way to allow to call FTL from screens >>>>> because, >>>>> in an ecommerce alike situation, it's not realistic to do it all with >>>>> form >>>>> widgets (at least as is now). Could be allowed on certain component for >>>>> instance or using properties. >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 01/12/2016 à 09:56, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> I think by introducing a new DSL we can enforce no leakage of HTML / >>>>> FTL >>>>> >>>>>> into any widgets (I'm assuming this is what you guys are talking >>>>>> about) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Nicely said, thanks Julien :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 01/12/2016 à 09:46, Julien NICOLAS a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Pierre, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hope that, like code source convention, people will respect the >>>>>>>> work >>>>>>>> done and respect people behind them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think that I'll do my best to explain the reason of the work I'll >>>>>>>> begin, hope that it will be accepted by the community, hope that it >>>>>>>> will be >>>>>>>> implemented in all OFBiz screens. I know that the OFBiz community >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> good >>>>>>>> people and respect that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But you true, it could happens that somebody fail to follow rules, I >>>>>>>> hope >>>>>>>> I see it in code review and ask for an update ;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm quite sure that when you'll be charmed by this UI standard, >>>>>>>> you'll >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> also a rules keeper <3 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Have a nice day, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Julien. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 30/11/2016 21:16, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So when you speak of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a super-structure that will be used in place of currently >>>>>>>>> conventions >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> are not always respected >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> how do you envision that with that new 'super-structure' >>>>>>>>> conventions >>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>> be respected? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> >>>>>>>>> OFBiz based solutions & services >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace >>>>>>>>> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Jacques Le Roux < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Julien >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Inline ... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Le 30/11/2016 à 10:02, Julien NICOLAS a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Jacques, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 30/11/2016 08:51, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - Each screen must be linked to a screen structure. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What would be this screen structure? You don't need to develop >>>>>>>>>>> much >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>> this stage, just that I can't vision what it would be. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This structure is to follow the a UI standard that can be >>>>>>>>>>>> managed >>>>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> theme. For example, the find screen can be define as : >>>>>>>>>>> - A research field area >>>>>>>>>>> - A result area >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ah, I see, we have already this concept in screen widget. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If all the find screen could be linked to this structure, it will >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> easier for theme to manage it's own template of search screen. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You mean that it would be a super-structure that will be used in >>>>>>>>>>> place >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> currently conventions which are not always respected, I see. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It will be included in the main decorator that will also linked >>>>>>>>>> to a >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> structure, so theme can manage to change the template. And when >>>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>>> the theme, it could be a completely different look and feel :) >>>>>>>>>>> I hope I explain well my thought. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Got it, thanks :) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Why we need a new component to test new theme ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When I start working with OFBiz, I was so surprised that the UI is >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> too >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> heavy. Then I was thinking that I have to improve the UI to >>>>>>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>>>>> a best >>>>>>>>>>>>> one. After several try I understand that the actual UI is not a >>>>>>>>>>>>> final user >>>>>>>>>>>>> interface. It is a developer one. It's a developer UI because >>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>> contain >>>>>>>>>>>>> all the features developed. But definitively, we can't provide >>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>> kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>> UI to final users, we have to simplify it. In the same times, >>>>>>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>>> can't >>>>>>>>>>>>> delete the current UI because developers need to improve it >>>>>>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>>> features that will help us to deploy new features to our final >>>>>>>>>>>>> users. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For this new component, we can implement an existing component >>>>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>>>> simplified and ready for the new theme(s). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean we could take and existing component, say example for >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> instance, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and would simply it at the UI level. I picked example because >>>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>>> already >>>>>>>>>>>> rather simple and contains demonstration of features. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, I mean to define a component (party, product, facility, >>>>>>>>>>>> etc.) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that we >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> start to re-implement (using the existing services) but in a more >>>>>>>>>>> simple >>>>>>>>>>> way (without all the features, selecting only the main ones). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I see >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In conclusion, if the new component dedicated for test a new >>>>>>>>>>> theme >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> match to the community needs, Taher think to a super simplified >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> developer >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> user interface that facilitate developers to improve the >>>>>>>>>>>>> software. >>>>>>>>>>>>> A >>>>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>>> interface without any constraint that allow developers to >>>>>>>>>>>>> develop >>>>>>>>>>>>> easily >>>>>>>>>>>>> new features. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Another thing I can't vision at this stage, no hurry, I guess >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> later >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> :) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, too many thing to explain, I have to add details about this >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> point, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'll do it soon ^^ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I did not get a chance to look yet at the POC Nicolas, Gil and >>>>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> working on. I guess I'd get the ideas from there then? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >
