Hi Tim, thanks for replying :)
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Tim Schaub <tsch...@opengeo.org> wrote: > Regardless of which you think has more utility (using OpenLayers syntax > and delegating to the widget framework for the UI vs. using widget > framework syntax and delegating to OpenLayers for the mapping), both > approaches could potentially benefit from changes to OpenLayers. > > I like the idea of starting to develop OpenLayers controls that don't > add any redundancy or extra overhead (think dom elements and event > listeners) when another widget framework is in use. Can you get a bit more concrete how this could look like? Would it be similar what I've done (though my way adds extra overhead (lots of callbacks and passing on values)? > Whatever we do, I don't see the sense in working on anything that limits > folks to the lowest common denominator of all (supported) widget frameworks. Agreed. Do you see such a problem with my approach? > Interested to hear what others think. Me too. Cheers, Volker > Volker Mische wrote: >> Dropping some code into the wild doesn't seem to be the right way to >> start a discussion. But hopefully this mail will. >> >> I've updated the example at [1] a bit. It now shows the usage of >> jQuery and Dojo. Especially interesting is the code of the >> OpenLayers.Control.ZoomSlider [2], it's an implementation that >> resembles the GeoExt.ZoomSlider. >> >> The question is: Is it a good idea to create OpenLayers controls that >> are independent of the underlying JavaScript library? This would push >> OpenLayers into the framework direction. You would embed functionality >> from a JavaScript lib into Openlayers. Or would it be better to leave >> OpenLayers (as it was meant to be) as a library and every JavaScript >> lib creates its own widgets and embeds OpenLayers. If the library-way >> is prefered, should devs even be discouraged from creating new >> controls based on raw JavaScript/OpenLayers and not on a lib? >> >> Creating JavaScript lib independent controls would be a chance to >> collaborate accros libs (how great would it be to team up the GeoExt >> ppl with the jQuerz fanboys). But I'm well aware that GeoExt is >> already going down the other way, and based on the maturity it already >> has, it seems almost impossible to change the direction. >> >> Cheers, >> Volker >> >> [1] http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/vmx/ui/examples/jq-zoom.html >> [2] http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/vmx/ui/lib/geojq/olui.js >> >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Volker Mische <volker.mis...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> at the FOSS4G 2009 at the OpenLayers BoF we discussed a bit that it >>> would be cool to have an easier way for integrating controls that are >>> based on other JavaScript libraries like jQuery, Dojo or ExtJs. At the >>> code sprint we (ahocevar, rdewit and I) got a bit more specific at the >>> whiteboard. No I finally managed to get some code done. >>> >>> Please have a look at my sandbox at an example: >>> http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/vmx/ui/examples/jq-zoom.html >>> >>> The buttons at the top could be OpenLayers ones, the others below are >>> jQuery UI ones. The important bits are at >>> http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/vmx/ui/lib/geojq/olui.js >>> >>> It's only a rough cut, but you should get the basic idea. The idea is to >>> separate the visualisation/representation of a control from the >>> functionality. >>> >>> What do you think about it? BTW: There are no changes to OpenLayers code >>> base. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Volker >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@openlayers.org >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > > > -- > Tim Schaub > OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org > Expert service straight from the developers. > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@openlayers.org > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
