Hi Olaf, As you try out various beads, you are doing the Royale form of snippet-pasting. In the future, if we add more metadata, we might even be able to tell you if a bead is compatible or not. That is unlikely to happen for folks pasting snippets into their HTML editor.
But you if you are trying to compare Flex to Royale in terms of ease of use of components, then you should be working with the Express set which should have almost every bead baked in so you shouldn't have to be trying so many beads. And, we could certainly create another component set that has more Flex-like APIs, but not replicate the class hierarchy underneath it. And if we really had time, we could create a component that replicates 90% of Flex APIs, but it would be a ton of work and be a lot of code and may not perform well. Because we have components and a compiler and IDEs, it is possible to have the compiler and IDEs create databases of what beads are known to work with what components and vice-versa. We don't have that now, but if you want to work on that, feel free to do so. But it is possible since we can annotate the component that wraps the HTML snippet. That sort of thing is much less likely to happen for folks pasting snippets into their HTML editor. I'm not sure what your definition is of "platform", but I hope there will be many component sets for Royale and some will be specific to certain platforms. All we are doing is creating a pattern for encapsulating and gluing together code. My 2 cents, -Alex On 11/23/17, 3:40 AM, "Olaf Krueger" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Alex, > >>Welcome back. > >Thank you! > >>Can you elaborate on how Royale MXML is different from Flex >MXML > >Maybe I have exaggerated a bit when I said that we can't reuse Flex MXML >knowledge. >Of course, that basic principle is the same and some important attributes >are also the same. >So, yes, we can reuse this knowledge. >I think the main problem (for me) is that it's not so easy to know which >components are working well with which beads. And it's also not so easy to >find a bead that solves a particular problem. >What I am often doing is to copy and paste a bead to different parents and >if nothing works I replace e.g. a container by a group or whatever and >test >it again. >But each modification needs a compilation to check the results. And this >is >time-consuming. > >Maybe the Flex way is more intuitive. You can just pop-up the available >component attributes by your IDE to check out what is there. If e.g. all >attributes of a Flex component would be loosely coupled and available for >tons of other components it would be a similar problem. >Please don't get me wrong: >I think I understand the beads concept and I don't want to say that it is >bad, but it would be great to have the possibility to list all relevant >beads for a particular component. >(Maybe this is already there and I didn't realize it) > >> Snippet-pasting is easy >Don't get me wrong, I don't want to say that we should be able to just >copy >and paste whatever snippet >into our code. I tried to say that all these snippets out there are really >helpful to solve your particular problem or they gives you new ideas of >how >to implement something. >These tons of HTML/CSS3 snippets are similar to what we had in the Flex >world years ago with all these tons of Flex blogs and docs. At the end an >indispensable resource of ideas for solutions to problems. > >>Wrapping HTML/CSS/JS/SVG/WASM in components will allow our workflow to >provide more and more information to our developers. > >That basically sounds like the right way... but I am not sure if it really >works to have one component set that targets multiple platforms. >What I am thinking of is to have different component sets, each >specialized >for a particular platform and regarding HTML by using all the stuff >(elements/properties/selectors) which is already there in the HTML world. > >But I have to admit that I am still not sure by myself if this makes >sense... > >Probably I also have to re-read your words a few times to make sure I got >what you said ;-) > >Thank you!! > >Olaf > > > > > > > > > >-- >Sent from: >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-roy >ale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ceb31693b8604403b2 >d2b08d53266f65b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6364703401629 >78691&sdata=QtjCopbp%2BKnUYgV3Wkmvxx2Cw0fyWhpH%2Bh8FmEC3BKY%3D&reserved=0
