ActionScript does not provide a mechanism for taking an existing class and
adding new methods or properties to it.
In this case, I don't think you have any other option than to use bracket
syntax, like indicator_content["animate"].
- Josh
On 2019/05/03 21:08:56, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
> Another more question I just found and don't know how to solve.
>
> if I have a polyfill like Web Animations API that adds "animate" method to
> any Element object.
> Can someone post an example of an @extern file for a case like this? I
> don't imagine right now how can this be done, and maybe right not it can't
> be done.
>
> Example code I'm using now with brackets notation is:
>
> indicator_content["animate"]({ <this is an object with animation data to
> pass to animate method> });
>
> so I want royale user can do instead:
>
> indicator_content.animate({...});
>
> thanks
>
> El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 23:03, Carlos Rovira (<carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I now Greg is busy now with an important update
> > I can try to do it myself if Alex point me to the code I should look, for
> > me it would be part of the task to make this blog example in the best way
> > possible.
> > thanks
> >
> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 22:58, Greg Dove (<greg.d...@gmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> >> 'I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html. Volunteers are
> >> welcome to teach the compiler to do so.'
> >> I am happy to look into this sometime in the next few days. Just trying to
> >> finish up something else first...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Carlos,
> >> >
> >> > I'm pretty sure externs are not scanned for inject_html. Volunteers are
> >> > welcome to teach the compiler to do so.
> >> >
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> > On 5/3/19, 1:50 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > while putting the pieces together for the blog example I'm finding
> >> the
> >> > following.
> >> >
> >> > For classes that wraps a js code that is an intrinsic file needed to
> >> > make
> >> > the code function I think inject_html should work but I'm trying it
> >> and
> >> > seems this is not working. The code is like this:
> >> >
> >> > package
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> > * @externs
> >> > */
> >> > public class hljs
> >> > {
> >> > /**
> >> > * <inject_html>
> >> > * <script src="
> >> >
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fhighlight.min.js&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Ly6nMG8kCFvf2Dl4PCohbV8T9MPU%2F7OV2CaYrQNFXnY%3D&reserved=0
> >> > "></script>
> >> > * <link rel="stylesheet" title="Atom One Dark" href="
> >> >
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdnjs.cloudflare.com%2Fajax%2Flibs%2Fhighlight.js%2F9.12.0%2Fstyles%2Fatom-one-dark.min.css&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=C512YPiiwRTU909ZEV5dOT94FELRDVSqm4mNYt58fLY%3D&reserved=0
> >> > ">
> >> > * </inject_html>
> >> > */
> >> > public function hljs()
> >> > {
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > public static function highlightBlock(block:Element):void {}
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > So instead of add the inject_html in the code that calls the
> >> methods in
> >> > this step, I think it should be here
> >> >
> >> > Make this sense?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > El vie., 3 may. 2019 a las 9:38, Carlos Rovira (<
> >> > carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> >> > escribió:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Alex,
> >> > >
> >> > > for me is difficult right now think about what would be better for
> >> > > TypeScript. I think all will depend on how people interact in the
> >> > following
> >> > > months/years to show us what't the best for Royale in the long
> >> term.
> >> > > I think bringing TS to Royale as a first citizen language will
> >> make
> >> > us
> >> > > more accesible and people will considere us more since TS is the
> >> > language
> >> > > people choose over AS3 (although I for example like AS3 more and
> >> if
> >> > we get
> >> > > few things like generics we'll be great to compete with TS), but
> >> > this is a
> >> > > very complex task, so I know this hardly be done unless someone
> >> > comes with
> >> > > time and knowledge to make it happen. And if we think about things
> >> > that are
> >> > > complex and hard to add and see the importance/value it will
> >> bring to
> >> > > Royale I think a WebAssembly target will be over TS since it
> >> clearly
> >> > > enhance the Roayle purpose of generate multiple sources.
> >> > >
> >> > > In the other hand, make TS just to do TypeDefs, again maybe users
> >> > should
> >> > > express here if it could be needed, I can't say right now how much
> >> > this
> >> > > could be important for Royale, so maybe time and users will let us
> >> > know
> >> > > what to do.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 22:44, Alex Harui
> >> > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>)
> >> > > escribió:
> >> > >
> >> > >> The word "package" has many meanings. In AS3 it is a way of
> >> > avoiding API
> >> > >> name collisions. AIUI, an AS3 package in SWF code has no object
> >> or
> >> > >> function representation. It effectively just creates a longer
> >> > "qualified
> >> > >> name". IOW, in a SWF, if there is a class "mx.core.UIComponent",
> >> > there is
> >> > >> no "mx.core" object you can iterate to see all of the classes.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> For Royale's JS output, an AS3 package has an object
> >> representation
> >> > in
> >> > >> debug mode because we use the same pattern as Google Closure. So
> >> > there
> >> > >> really would be an "mx" Object with a "core" property object
> >> with a
> >> > >> UIComponent function that serves as the constructor. However, in
> >> > >> production, these package objects are often collapsed, so it is
> >> > best to not
> >> > >> assume the objects exist.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Then there are Node/NPM packages and modules and other sorts of
> >> > >> "packaging". But in this thread I was only referencing AS3
> >> > Packages.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Also in this thread I mentioned TypeScript. While Royale could
> >> > support
> >> > >> TypeScript as Carlos mentioned, as an alternative to writing
> >> AS3, I
> >> > only
> >> > >> mentioned it because the existence of a TypeScript definition
> >> for a
> >> > library
> >> > >> indicates that the library can have a strongly-typed API surface
> >> > which
> >> > >> means it is highly likely you can create Royale typedefs for that
> >> > library,
> >> > >> and because I thought that Josh's converter was still working.
> >> > Supporting
> >> > >> TypeScript as an alternative programming language in Royale is a
> >> > >> significant chunk of work and is not something I plan to work on
> >> at
> >> > this
> >> > >> time. But I was only mentioning using TypeScript to generate
> >> > typedefs,
> >> > >> which is a different effort and could be a smaller effort and
> >> give
> >> > us
> >> > >> access to a huge set of typedefs. I have no plans to work on
> >> that
> >> > at this
> >> > >> time either, but I could imagine myself working on that if there
> >> > was enough
> >> > >> demand for it.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> HTH,
> >> > >> -Alex
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On 5/2/19, 11:24 AM, "Dany Dhondt" <archeme...@mac.com.INVALID>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Hi Josh,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Aren’t most of the packages just functions?
> >> > >> In ES6, you’d import packages as
> >> > >> Import { myFunct, myVar } from ‘my-package’
> >> > >> In older javascript you’d:
> >> > >> const myPackagePointer = require(‘my-package’)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> So your ‘fun’ example sounds like heaven to me! This is
> >> exactly
> >> > what
> >> > >> we need.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> About Typescript: do we need that at all? I think, but maybe
> >> > this
> >> > >> goes beyond my technical knowledge, all node packages are
> >> compiled
> >> > into
> >> > >> plain old javascript functions. Typescript is only needed for
> >> > authoring the
> >> > >> packages. Once compiled there’s no trace of Typescript at all. If
> >> > this is
> >> > >> indeed true, then we shouldn’t bother about Typescript at all,
> >> and
> >> > just
> >> > >> concentrate on incorporating the pure javascript libs.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Dany
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > Op 2 mei 2019, om 19:57 heeft Josh Tynjala <
> >> > joshtynj...@apache.org>
> >> > >> het volgende geschreven:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Just for fun, here's another way that you could create a
> >> > typedef
> >> > >> for hljs so that the highlightBlock() function is directly in a
> >> > package
> >> > >> (similar to flash.net.navigateToURL), instead of as a static
> >> method
> >> > on a
> >> > >> class:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2FkhVI&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=E%2BzcgdC3TLRNC%2FL8IfXSeXQZslQJP7pEMcL5z%2FpcV3g%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > If you did it this way, you'd need to import it before you
> >> > can call
> >> > >> the function, like this:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > import hljs.highlightBlock;
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Or this should work too, if you prefer:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > import hljs.*;
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > And then you can call the function directly (without the
> >> hljs.
> >> > >> prefix):
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > highlightBlock(block);
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > As you can see, the way that you choose to expose a JS
> >> > library to
> >> > >> ActionScript is pretty flexible. Some JavaScript libraries are
> >> just
> >> > a
> >> > >> function, and some have APIs that work more like classes.
> >> Depending
> >> > on the
> >> > >> library, one way may work better than the other.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > - Josh
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On 2019/05/02 17:48:49, Josh Tynjala <
> >> joshtynj...@apache.org>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> >> Exactly right. When you create a typedef class, you're
> >> > trying to
> >> > >> simulate how you would access the API as if you were writing in
> >> > plain
> >> > >> JavaScript. You call hljs.highlightBlock() in JavaScript, so you
> >> > need a
> >> > >> class that works the same way in ActionScript.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Another option for organization would be to keep all of
> >> your
> >> > >> typedefs in a separate folder from your app's source files, and
> >> > reference
> >> > >> the typedefs folder using the source-path compiler option.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> - Josh
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> On 2019/05/02 16:23:45, Alex Harui
> >> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID
> >> > >
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>> Hi Carlos,
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> I don’t think hljs is in a package called "externs". In
> >> > Josh's
> >> > >> example, hljs was in the top-level package. And that's because
> >> > hljs is
> >> > >> found at runtime off of the global window object, not some
> >> > sub-object
> >> > >> called "externs". So, the hljs.as file containing the externs
> >> has
> >> > to go
> >> > >> in the root of a source-path, not in some folder called "externs"
> >> > (which is
> >> > >> why some folks will take the time to create a separate typedefs
> >> SWC
> >> > so as
> >> > >> not to clutter the root of their application's source directory).
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Then instead of "import externs.hljs", it should be
> >> "import
> >> > hljs"
> >> > >> (or shouldn’t be needed at all).
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> HTH,
> >> > >> >>> -Alex
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> On 5/2/19, 9:11 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> >> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Hi,
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> in my latest commit I added hljs extern class like
> >> Josh
> >> > show
> >> > >> in package
> >> > >> >>> externs in TDJ
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Then I didn't commit the following since is not
> >> working
> >> > for me:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> 1.- In HighlightCode class (in utils package TDJ)
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> added:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> import externs.hljs;
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> changed the method highlightBlock to:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> COMPILE::JS
> >> > >> >>> /**
> >> > >> >>> * block is the element (WrappedHTMLElement) inside the
> >> > >> component (the
> >> > >> >>> <code> tag)
> >> > >> >>> */
> >> > >> >>> public function
> >> > highlightBlock(block:Element):void
> >> > >> >>> {
> >> > >> >>> hljs.highlightBlock(block);
> >> > >> >>> }
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> and running it I get:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Uncaught ReferenceError: externs is not defined
> >> > >> >>> at utils.HighlightCode.highlightBlock
> >> > (HighlightCode.as:53)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> WelcomeSection.components.ExampleAndSourceCodeTabbedSectionContent.dataReadyHandler
> >> > >> >>> (ExampleAndSourceCodeTabbedSectionContent.as:138)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> services.GitHubService.goog.events.EventTarget.fireListeners
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:284)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > Function.goog.events.EventTarget.dispatchEventInternal_
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:381)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> services.GitHubService.goog.events.EventTarget.dispatchEvent
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:196)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> >>> services.GitHubService.org
> >> > >> .apache.royale.events.EventDispatcher.dispatchEvent
> >> > >> >>> (EventDispatcher.js:71)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> services.GitHubService.services_GitHubService_completeHandler
> >> > >> >>> (GitHubService.as:54)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> >>> org.apache.royale.net
> >> > >> .HTTPService.goog.events.EventTarget.fireListeners
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:284)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > Function.goog.events.EventTarget.dispatchEventInternal_
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:381)
> >> > >> >>> at
> >> > >> >>> org.apache.royale.net
> >> > >> .HTTPService.goog.events.EventTarget.dispatchEvent
> >> > >> >>> (eventtarget.js:196)
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> What I'm doing wrong?
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> thanks!
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 18:02, Carlos Rovira (<
> >> > >> carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> >> > >> >>> escribió:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>> Hi Josh,
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> I think this piece of knowledge you just exposed here is
> >> > key for
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> >>>> success of Royale.
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> I'll try to use this in TDJ to experiment with it and
> >> will
> >> > use
> >> > >> in the blog
> >> > >> >>>> example I plan to do.
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> thanks!
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> El jue., 2 may. 2019 a las 16:36, Josh Tynjala (<
> >> > >> joshtynj...@apache.org>)
> >> > >> >>>> escribió:
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Users can't do this, they required that Royale
> >> framework
> >> > devs
> >> > >> add
> >> > >> >>>>> typedefs to the typedefs repo and wait to next SDK
> >> > release.
> >> > >> What does not
> >> > >> >>>>> seems very useful.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> Users can create their own typedefs from scratch.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> I just created a quick example for hljs, that exposes
> >> the
> >> > >> >>>>> highlightBlock() function:
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2FdIq0&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=hyGPtFg919vlEreGs9E7OqkqRcSHImOIGt8Mt5FNfaI%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> Basically, the class needs an asdoc comment with the
> >> > @externs
> >> > >> tag (this
> >> > >> >>>>> is something that comes from Google Closure compiler,
> >> > which we
> >> > >> use to
> >> > >> >>>>> create release builds) and the compiler should handle
> >> the
> >> > rest.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> As I understand it, you don't even need to create a SWC
> >> > library
> >> > >> for
> >> > >> >>>>> custom typedefs. Recently, Alex mentioned that the
> >> mxmlc
> >> > >> compiler is smart
> >> > >> >>>>> enough to handle a source file as long as it has the
> >> > @externs
> >> > >> tag.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> - Josh
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> On 2019/05/02 09:34:37, Carlos Rovira <
> >> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>> Hi,
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> to sumarize (let me know if I'm wrong), the current
> >> ways
> >> > to
> >> > >> integrate an
> >> > >> >>>>>> existing library are 3:
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> 1.- access vía brackets notation: This is the most
> >> easy
> >> > and
> >> > >> direct, an
> >> > >> >>>>>> example is TourDeJewel in class utils.HighlightCode
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> var hljs:Object = window["hljs"];
> >> > >> >>>>>> hljs["highlightBlock"](block);
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> but this one is not what we really want since we are
> >> > going
> >> > >> with Roayle
> >> > >> >>>>> and
> >> > >> >>>>>> AS3 to get type checking and strong typing. So this,
> >> > although
> >> > >> useful is
> >> > >> >>>>> not
> >> > >> >>>>>> what we really want to use in out Apps, but since we
> >> > want to
> >> > >> maintain
> >> > >> >>>>> the
> >> > >> >>>>>> dynamic aspect of the language it could be very useful
> >> > >> sometimes
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> 2.- using typedefs
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> This will be the next step to use a real type and dot
> >> > >> notation, but
> >> > >> >>>>> seems
> >> > >> >>>>>> not easy or direct.
> >> > >> >>>>>> Users can't do this, they required that Royale
> >> framework
> >> > devs
> >> > >> add
> >> > >> >>>>> typedefs
> >> > >> >>>>>> to the typedefs repo and wait to next SDK release.
> >> What
> >> > does
> >> > >> not seems
> >> > >> >>>>> very
> >> > >> >>>>>> useful.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> In the other hand we'll need to know how to extend
> >> > current
> >> > >> typedefs
> >> > >> >>>>> since
> >> > >> >>>>>> don't know if we have docs about this. Until now I
> >> added
> >> > to
> >> > >> "missing.js"
> >> > >> >>>>>> file fo now, but this doesn't seems a valid path since
> >> > it lacks
> >> > >> >>>>>> organization, separation, and a way for all people
> >> > >> contributing to know
> >> > >> >>>>> wha
> >> > >> >>>>>> we have, what can be added and where, if not we'll
> >> find
> >> > in
> >> > >> time lots of
> >> > >> >>>>>> code very difficult to maintain.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Yishay and Josh talked about to use TypeScript, but
> >> > seems that
> >> > >> is
> >> > >> >>>>> already
> >> > >> >>>>>> explored by Josh but not a valid path since will be
> >> very
> >> > >> difficult to
> >> > >> >>>>>> maintain.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> 3.- wrapping libraries
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> This is how we did with MDL. This will be recommended
> >> > when we
> >> > >> want to
> >> > >> >>>>>> integrate existing libraries with Royale to make it
> >> work
> >> > with
> >> > >> our APIs
> >> > >> >>>>> in a
> >> > >> >>>>>> more seamless way. But the problems is that this is
> >> very
> >> > >> laborious. Can
> >> > >> >>>>> be
> >> > >> >>>>>> useful for some concrete libraries and we should do
> >> when
> >> > >> needed (the
> >> > >> >>>>> case
> >> > >> >>>>>> is MDL). But the problem is that this not solve the
> >> > problem of
> >> > >> our users
> >> > >> >>>>>> that need to integrate a existing library themselves
> >> in a
> >> > >> quick way.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Let me know if you know other way.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> For me method 1, is ok to do the work, but doesn't
> >> make
> >> > us
> >> > >> justice.
> >> > >> >>>>>> method 2 should be the main one if there's a fast and
> >> > easy
> >> > >> way... I'm
> >> > >> >>>>>> missing something here? Can users create typedefs
> >> > themselves?
> >> > >> >>>>>> method 3 can be useful for us or for users (doing
> >> their
> >> > own
> >> > >> libs, and
> >> > >> >>>>>> eventually can share with us to add to official royale
> >> > repo
> >> > >> and sdk)
> >> > >> >>>>>> but is something not fast at all and not as convenient
> >> > and
> >> > >> direct as
> >> > >> >>>>> method
> >> > >> >>>>>> 2, and will require maintenance as libs change.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Could we agree that this is the currently available
> >> ways
> >> > in
> >> > >> Royale now
> >> > >> >>>>> to
> >> > >> >>>>>> use external JS libs?
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> thanks
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> --
> >> > >> >>>>>> Carlos Rovira
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550849329&sdata=Y4KEWA%2BiX8w0X8ERfqU5%2FzVlAoEIm8XeEkCowIeRC4Y%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> --
> >> > >> >>>> Carlos Rovira
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550859338&sdata=0jc3vowPhWNFT3kVOO40WG55yfBxqosrg10bfeckpDE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> --
> >> > >> >>> Carlos Rovira
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550859338&sdata=0jc3vowPhWNFT3kVOO40WG55yfBxqosrg10bfeckpDE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Carlos Rovira
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550859338&sdata=0jc3vowPhWNFT3kVOO40WG55yfBxqosrg10bfeckpDE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Carlos Rovira
> >> >
> >> >
> >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C868c28fb190b470d90c608d6d00907c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636925134550859338&sdata=0jc3vowPhWNFT3kVOO40WG55yfBxqosrg10bfeckpDE%3D&reserved=0
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
