Hi Alex, 2017-11-03 7:39 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>:
> Hi Carlos, > > Looks good to me. Thanks for doing this. > Thanks :) > > I'm not sure I understand all of the aspects of this effort. My current > understanding is that Google Material is under the Apache License and thus > we can use it if we want to. Am I correct that MaterialDesignLite is one > implementation of Google Material and we could create our own > implementation and it could be visually different? > We can implement our own material in Royale, but I'm afraid that doing that will not make us highlight our solution against the rest of competitors. Another point is something I said various times: When I did MDL, I notice a huge problem: MDL has its own set of components, some are in all sets (Button) but others not (Card), and they has it's own implementation, what make it almost impossible generalize a theme. For this reason I always point that we need our own set and there we can implement themes. But other *externa* sets will never get this since they have its own implementation and most important once you start to develop with MDL you can't go back and change for other. So MDL is for me something we have until our own set are robust and highly configurable in both the things we can do and how can it could be represented, and switch between style should be really easy to change the global look of an App without much hassle. > > Also, IIRC, Material has different components than Flex did so we'd have > to invent some new looks anyway. So having a TextInput with borders all > around would just be our flavor of Material. > That's what I point above. We must to *freeze* the list of components at some time work over a concrete set We can then plan in the future include a new component in the official set, and that will need to work on the themes we already have to include the new one. > > Regarding colors, it looks like Material is parameterized around a couple > of colors. So if we did our skins to work against parameterized colors > then would it really matter what color we choose? > That's completly right. I could make wireframe based on two or three colors and as you change it in CSS all controls should tint consistently. > > Regarding Basic components, right now Checkbox is a <label><input > type="check"/>caption</label>. AIUI, you cannot style the <input> on many > browsers, so I think we have to have a different set of elements in a > checkbox. It looks like Bootstrap uses: > > <label><input type="check"/><span />Caption</label> > > Where the span uses a special symbol font with checked and unchecked boxes. > That's what we need to figure. Should we make themes available in Basic? if so, has basic the right implementation? If not, and if we don't want to change the actual very basic implementation, we need to put some "skin" implementation that at least in JS implementation I figure that will change one face (the actual basic) with the theme face. I'm thinking loud, since this is something we should explorer all together mixing the best ideas of people involved Thanks > > Thanks, > Alex > > On 11/2/17, 5:15 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" > <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I want to expose my initial work (very very initial) on two styles for > >Royale > > > > > >Wireframe: > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > https%3A%2F%2Fsnag.gy%2 > >FtDFxQT.jpg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cfa7b1b5a7 > >b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558& > sdata=%2Fk8YQxC5bDOaC > >D8ZfcTzpuqZyBNTKKvkFgqDgnnWZ%2BA%3D&reserved=0 > > > >(Wireframe intention is for quick Royale App prototyping, people will use > >this to start their applications, and then moving to it's own styling that > >could be another royale theme provided by us, or something done by users. > > > >Vivid (to put some temporal name): > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > https%3A%2F%2Fsnag.gy%2 > >FqKShm0.jpg&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cfa7b1b5a7 > >b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558& > sdata=kxYE7ylOsXPUEeE > >r%2BU3AnSe9zEyqgqmsIAAYW6nVuGs%3D&reserved=0 > > > >(*Please, Notice that only the first button has some styling here*) > >(This theme could be the default theme for royale components like halo was > >for mx and spark was for spark) > > > >I want to put in place all the main components, so I would need some > >"component list" (Button, TextInput, CheckBox,...and what more?.), and > >we'll be centering all the effort in only that list of components. > >We need to "paint" all and the code all. > > > >The concept of theme involve a concrete set of components (and this bring > >us again if we should do this to be pluggable for Basic, or go directly > >with Express, I think even Basic should be able to use a theme maybe using > >beads to be PAYG) > > > >So, before continue tomorrow, I want some feedback on this: > > > >* I think Wireframe is clearly something Black&White, maybe as I did, in > >some grey scale colors. But for Vivid, I'm still figuring if it should be > >something "flat" and very simple, or go with something more elaborated > >since the thing I did in the example with orange button. > > > >* I like the look and feel of Google Material, how textfields looks and > >behaves, the animations, and visual concepts. But the problem is that all > >that visuals are clearly Google Material. Should we create something more > >new? This has a problem that maybe we could reach something great....or > >not, and is more work to iterate something until we reach a good point. > >For example, the text input I created has the classic box look, for me > >Material Design is better with only a bootom line, but the first is more > >generalist, while the second is clearly google, android,... I could try to > >think in something new a see what happens > > > >* In the other hand, someone would want to join me in this effort? If so I > >could center in the design part, and other person could work with me on > >the > >example project "RoyaleThemes". The example app is very important, since > >it > >could have a playground for every component so we can tweak at runtime. we > >could even generate the code to get that look...this could be like > >FlexThemeManager App that we had in the Flex days. > > > >* About colors for the second again, don't have any preferences right now, > >I put the same colors that use on the web in the first button, but as I > >said before things (colors and forms) could change dramatically in the > >second set. In the first one (Wireframe) I think it's ok to go the path > >exposed in the image example. > > > >Thanks for your comments on this, we'll be defining what we want as we > >comment here ok? > >I'm done for today, > > > > > > > > > > > > > >2017-11-02 14:22 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>: > > > >> Thanks Harbs! > >> > >> very useful, I'll be keeping this info as I make some work > >> > >> Carlos > >> > >> 2017-11-02 12:13 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>: > >> > >>> BTW, the kind of thing we should be striving for in theme-able > >>>components > >>> is something like this: > >>> > >>> > >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > https%3A%2F%2Fvcalend > >>>ar.netlify.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cf > >>>a7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558&sdata= > b3VtV > >>>VdACL0Z2EVnIFo2%2BgqSFmJMocDL6k%2Ba6A1ewco%3D&reserved=0 > >>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > https%3A%2F%2Fvcalen > >>>dar.netlify.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7C > >>>fa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558&sdata= > b3Vt > >>>VVdACL0Z2EVnIFo2%2BgqSFmJMocDL6k%2Ba6A1ewco%3D&reserved=0> > >>> > >>> > On Nov 2, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > FYI, I worked out a theming class for my (Royale) InDesign extensions > >>> which allows for setting global CSS at runtime. The approach might be > >>> useful in your theming effort: > >>> > > >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.a > >>>pache.org%2FcOBC&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cfa > >>>7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558& > sdata=bRWKxm > >>>LL16u%2B48IXYdA%2FoEtLWF3eU%2FIGQzBfcVCar5g%3D&reserved=0 > >>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste > . > >>>apache.org%2FcOBC&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cf > >>>a7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558&sdata= > bRWKx > >>>mLL16u%2B48IXYdA%2FoEtLWF3eU%2FIGQzBfcVCar5g%3D&reserved=0> > >>> > > >>> > (Some of the code is specific to Adobe Extensions.) > >>> > > >>> > Some pointers: > >>> > I used inject_html because I needed some overrides in a CSS file. I > >>> might have been able to rework it so the CSS file was not needed. > >>> > > >>> > There is a function called createStyleSheet which is commented out. > >>> That creates a stylesheet called “royale_theme_styles”. It’s the same > >>>as > >>> including a blank css file with the same name, but it’s loaded > >>>dynamically > >>> rather than requiring the file to be included. If that function is used > >>> inject_html is not necessary. > >>> > > >>> > The order of dynamically loaded CSS has the same rules as CSS loaded > >>> via declaring it in HTML and the later ones override the earlier ones. > >>>We > >>> can probably take advantage of that for different levels of defaults. > >>> > > >>> > HTH, > >>> > Harbs > >>> > > >>> >> On Nov 1, 2017, at 8:05 PM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org > >>> <mailto:carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> Hi, > >>> >> > >>> >> I think I could start to try what Harbs expose, although I think > >>>what I > >>> >> will need in the end is to control some SVG parts with variables. > >>>Maybe > >>> >> with the showed SVG/CSS relation could be sufficient. I'll be > >>>showing > >>> how > >>> >> limitations I find. As well as Alex said having inline SVG as HTML > >>> would be > >>> >> very useful. > >>> >> > >>> >> 2017-11-01 18:27 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com <mailto: > >>> harbs.li...@gmail.com>>: > >>> >> > >>> >>> I’m not sure. I haven’t seen problems. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> The only issues that come to mind are: > >>> >>> 1. There’s no load events on SVG images on Microsoft browsers. > >>> >>> 2. Chrome has issues with SVG, transforms and fractional pixels. > >>> >>> 3. There’s some blending issues that different browsers handle > >>> differently > >>> >>> depending on isolation modes. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> There’s likely other issues, but these are ones that I’ve had to > >>>deal > >>> with. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> The major gotcha in terms of mixing HTML and SVG is that HTML can > >>>not > >>> be > >>> >>> nested inside SVG without ForeignObject. ForeignObject does not > >>>have > >>> full > >>> >>> browser support. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>> On Nov 1, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID > >>> <mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>> wrote: > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> A couple of years ago, I thought I had learned that some browsers > >>>had > >>> >>>> issues with SVG background-images. Maybe psuedo-states were > >>> involved, > >>> >>> but > >>> >>>> a Button might "blink" as it changed states and loaded an SVG > >>> >>>> background-image. Do we know if that was just a bug in some > >>>browser > >>> or > >>> >>> is > >>> >>>> that still a concern? > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> I think I would like to see a simple set of HTML/SVG/CSS/JS that > >>> shows > >>> >>> how > >>> >>>> any declarative SVG and JS have to work together to handle > >>>resizable > >>> >>>> skins/components. Then it might be more obvious what needs to > >>> change in > >>> >>>> the tooling. We allow inline HTML now in MXML. I think we > >>> can/should > >>> >>>> allow inline SVG, but for both inline HTML and SVG, id's in the > >>> inline > >>> >>>> content do not become id's to MXML and AS. > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> HTH, > >>> >>>> -Alex > >>> >>>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Carlos Rovira > >> > >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me% > >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cfa7b1 > >>b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558& > sdata=C7a72gwfH2 > >>64wTla%2Fl%2FT9fLB5ODZWiSnRqIzGfFCREU%3D&reserved=0 > >> > >> > > > > > >-- > >Carlos Rovira > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 > >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7C%7C203485b5b9c744aed92608d52250 > 0f48%7Cfa7b1b5 > >a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636452649612378558& > sdata=C7a72gwfH264w > >Tla%2Fl%2FT9fLB5ODZWiSnRqIzGfFCREU%3D&reserved=0 > > -- <http://www.codeoscopic.com> Carlos Rovira Director General M: +34 607 22 60 05 http://www.codeoscopic.com Conocenos Avant2 en 1 minuto! <https://avant2.es/#video> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestras oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación necesaria.
