Hi Thai, Thanks for investigating the two options.
Option 2 might be better. Folks have to learn the new pattern of writing multiple files, so I think the learning curve for a new table directive is not that much of a difference. I think option 2 is going to be easier to maintain, since we have a layer of abstraction. It might even also increase adoptability since it would be easier to use. It might be harder to customize, but that would probably not be done often. The table directive would be used as is most of the time. My thought is design the code to be easy to use for the use case that will be used most of the time rather than the customization case which maybe harder to do. Which leads me to preferring option 2. Thanks, Lin On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Thai Q Tran <tqt...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Lin, > > I agree with you and Eric that we have a lot of HTML fragments. Some of > them I think make sense as directives: > The table footer is a good example of something we can convert into a > directive: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/207631/ > The table header on the other hand is something more specific to your > table: > https://github.com/openstack/horizon/blob/master/openstack_dashboard/dashboards/identity/static/dashboard/identity/users/table/table-header.html > > So there are two approaches we can take here: > 1. Keep some of the presentation related data in the HTML: mainly things > like table headers, column definitions, translated texts, etc... I like > this approach a bit more because it allow us to read the HTML and know > exactly what we are expecting to see. This table.html is compose of smaller > directives like hz-table-footer and regular html tags like <th> and <td> > etc... I think as we have more of these smaller directives available, we > can combine the fragments into one file. > > 2. We could create a more general table directive with a common template. > This is more inline with what we have currently for legacy. BUT the > presentation logic like translations, definitions would now have to reside > in the table controller AND we lose the semantic readability part. Doing it > this way could potentially introduce more complexity as it now requires > people to learn the table directive, which could be very complex if it does > not use smaller directives. Another common problem we encountered with this > pattern was a lack of customization. In legacy, it was pretty hard to add > an icon into a table cell. If we go down this route, I believe we might > start to encounter the same issues. > > In summary, we are working on addressing the HTML fragments, but I think > we as a community should go with option 1 and stay away from option 2. > > -----Lin Hua Cheng <os.lch...@gmail.com> wrote: ----- > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > From: Lin Hua Cheng <os.lch...@gmail.com> > Date: 08/18/2015 02:36PM > Cc: Vince Brunssen/Austin/IBM@IBMUS > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] Update on Angular Identity work > > > I think the table setup pattern have some opportunity for reducing code > duplication before it gets re-used by other panels.. > > We used to just need to write one file to define a table, now we have to > write 9 files [1]. Can we have a table directive to reduce the duplicated > code before moving forward to other panels? > > -Lin > > [1] > https://github.com/openstack/horizon/tree/master/openstack_dashboard/dashboards/identity/static/dashboard/identity/users/table > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Thai Q Tran <tqt...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Just wanted to keep everyone up to date on the angular panels work. The >> goal was to set a pattern that others can follow, to that end, there were a >> few requirements: >> 1. reusable and possibly pluggable >> 2. easy to understand >> 3. reduce code duplication >> >> These requirements don't always go hand-in-hand, and that is the primary >> reason why it is taking a bit longer. I believe we are nearing the end of >> it, here are some items remaining that I believe is crucial to finishing up >> this work. >> >> a. i18n was completed, so we need help moving gettext blobs to HTML >> templates (example patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/210366/ ) >> volunteers are welcomed! We want others to use the translate directive as >> the main way to translate text blobs, this was why we went down this road >> using babel and angular_extractor plugin. >> >> b. transfer table supports clone feature ( >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/211345/ ). There were a lot of template >> duplications, this clone feature reduces the HTML by a considerable amount. >> Since this is something we use quite often, it made sense to invest time >> into improving it. We have had complaints that there was too much HTML >> fragments, this will address a bit of that. One of the challenge was to get >> it working with existing launch-instance, so I spent about 2 weeks making >> sure it worked well with the old code while allowing the new clone feature. >> >> c. I believe we have a pretty good pattern setup for tables. The final >> piece of the puzzle was the patterns for various actions. We have wizard >> (create user), form (edit user), confirmation dialog (delete user), and >> actions with no modal dialog (enable user). We wanted a general pattern >> that would address the requirements mentioned above. There were some >> discussions around extensibility at the midcycle that I think will fit well >> here as well ( >> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/angular-workflow-plugin >> ). The actions can follow a similar pattern to workflow. I believe this >> pattern would address #1 and #3 but making it easy to understand is a bit >> challenging - I think this is where documentation could help. >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202315/ and a few other patches are >> going to be ready for review soon (sometime end of this week)! Item #c >> is the most important piece, it is going to be the general pattern that >> people will use to build their angular panels with, so the more eyes we can >> get on it, the better. My aim is to get it in before the feature freeze >> and I think that is entirely possible with your help. So please help review >> even if you are not a core! >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
