Thanks, Bob. On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Thomas Davie <tom.da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3 Feb 2009, at 08:12, Achim Schneider wrote: > > "John A. De Goes" <j...@n-brain.net> wrote: >> >> >>> Perhaps I should have been more precise: >>> >>> How do you define "layout" and "interaction semantics" in such a way >>> that the former has a *necessarily* direct, enormous impact on the >>> latter? >>> >>> HTML/CSS is a perfect example of how one can decouple a model of >>> content from the presentation of that content. The developer writes >>> the content model and the controller, while UX guys or designers get >>> to decide how it looks. >>> >>> HTML, or rather XML, would be layout to me. GUI's usually don't serve >> static content, and allowing a CSS layer to position eg. a filter GUI >> that supports chaining up any amount of filters by slicing them apart >> and positioning them on top of each other (maybe because someone didn't >> notice that you can use more than one filter) wrecks havoc on both >> usability and the semantics. >> >> "Wrecks havoc on the semantics" in the sense of that if a thing is >> editable, the semantics should guarantee that it is, indeed, editable. >> Likewise, if something is marked as visible (and such things are >> explicit in the model, not defined by an outer layer), the semantics >> should guarantee that it is visible. >> > > > I mostly don't get how a topic discussing how to do GUIs in a beautiful, > consistent, composable, orthogonal, functional way got onto the topic of "oh > hay, you could do it with html and css". Sure, those two may be declarative > languages, but that doesn't make either of them fill the list of features > required above! > > > Bob > > _______________________________________________ > Haskell-Cafe mailing list > Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe >
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
