I have been engaging in some hindsight about "stubs" this week as I work on
the gadget stuff.  Soon we will have a Gadget try-it working.  But honestly
I think this will prove more of a demo than an actual end-user interface.
Gadgets seem even more likely to require a custom interface than the
services hosted on the mashup server.

 

In addition, the try-it and now the gadget version of try-it, continue to
grow dramatically in complexity of the code.  It's no longer reasonable to
expect people to generate a try-it, then strip out parts they don't need as
they build their own custom UI/gadget.  It would be nicer to give them a
"stub" to fill in - just as the mashup editor does for custom HTML pages.
Right now that "template" isn't available outside the editor, and I for one
have regretted not having it to prepopulate my interface even when using
notepad.

 

And, it might be nice to be able to add even smarter templates in the
future.  For instance, one that includes some libraries for displaying
common datatypes, like dates (calendar view), structures (tree view,
tables).  Maybe these templates can actually be self-editing, allowing users
to drag things around and remove unnecessary items without actually editing
the code.  Where can we fit in these 'advanced templates'?

 

So here are a set of artifacts that it would be nice to have in building
interfaces:

-          HTML try-it (javascript, e4x, .)

-          Gadget try-it (Google, Yahoo, Live, .) (javascript, e4x, .)

-          HTML template (javascript, e4x, Flash, Silverlight .)

-          Gadget template (Google, Yahoo, Live, Vista, Apple .)
(javascript, e4x, .)

-          HTML advanced template (javascript, e4x, Flash, Silverlight .)

-          Gadget advanced template (Google, Yahoo, Live, Vista, Apple .)

-          Stubs (javascript, e4x, actionscript .)

 

How do we organize and name these things.  Currently, we have ?tryit and
?stub, and I'm proposing ?gadget.  But what should we call "templates"?
Actually, these are more like traditional "stubs."  Our stubs are more like
traditional "frameworks" or "libraries".  And does a try-it deserve a
different name if it appears in a gadget?

 

If I were starting today I might organize it thusly:

-          ?lib & lang=[javascript|e4x|actionscript|.]

-          ?tryit & flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadbet|.]
& lang=[javascript|e4x]

-          ?stub & flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadget|.] &
lang=[javascript|e4x]

-          ?ui & flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadget|.]

 

But I think we're already down the road with the misuse of "stub". 

 

How about

 

-          ?stub & lang=[javascript|e4x|actionscript|.]

-          ?tryit & flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadbet|.]
& lang=[javascript|e4x]

-          ?template &
flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadget|.] &
lang=[javascript|e4x]

-          ?ui & flavor=[html|google-gadget|yahoo-widget|vista-gadget|.]

 

?  Thoughts ?

 

Jonathan Marsh -  <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com -
<http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com

 

_______________________________________________
Mashup-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mashup-dev

Reply via email to