[flexcoders] Architecture question using Move Effect and Events
Hello, I'm struggling on wrapping my mind around the best way to architect a particular feature i am developing. i have gotten my code to work, but i want to improve it to make it work using a more stable and scaleble design. QUESTION: Now, the problem is when a user rolls the mouse over a custom MXML compoenent which already has a Move effect applied to it, I want the MXML component to stop moving. The custom MXML component has a Label, Text Area,and other components inside of it, but the mouse roll over Event is caught by the inner most UITextField component. Inside the Event Handler i have a very hacky way to stop the Move Effect: event.target.parent.parent.activeEffects[0].pause(); 1. how do i make the custom MXML component catch the event instead of the UITextField buried deep inside the component 2. how do i reference the MoveEffect for the MXML component without having to use parent.parent.activeEffects[0] since that is basically hardcoding. Any help would be greatly appreciated. For more information on my situation, i've posted some info: GOAL: the feature is simple, i have a custome MXML component that has a Label and a TextArea field inside of a Canvas. My flex application makes HttpService to my server and returns data which i put into an ArrayCollection. for each element in the ArrayCollection initialize a new custom MXML component, I bind it to my custom MXML component which i initialize and apply an effect to the MXML component so that the component moves across the screen in various places. The component should stop moving when a user rolls his/her mouse over the component. Thanks for all of your help! --Deven
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 01:18, Jeremy Merritt wrote: What we want to offer is a way to share the UI they create with others, over the web. I'd go with an XML description of the GUI. -- Tom Chiverton Helping to enthusiastically lead prospective platforms This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
OK, interesting stuff!
It's not clear from your description how a given
user would choose the right application build for them.
I can see two possibilities.
1) A flex front end loads a menu (from a web
service) offering a list of application builds to the user (I suppose this might
change for different users, or even just be a single choice for each user?). The
application UI specifics are then loaded into the flex app and the UI
reconfigured.
2) A flex front end loads a menu (as before) but
instead of reconfiguring the UI, executes a separate pre-compiled swf that
implements the appropriate UI. The pre-compiled swf would have been created when
the desktop app
generated the configuration info, it would then
translate the generated configuration to mxml, invoke the compiler to generate
the swf and add the swf reference to the list of apps offered to the
user.
Both these options would provide a fairly seamless
experience for the user, with the only delays being experienced (not by the end
user) when generating a new UI using the desktop app.
Paul
- Original Message -
From:
Jeremy Merritt
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:08
AM
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Architecture
question
Thanks for the input Paul.The desktop application is a
tool to build dynamic models of systems and author an interface for others to
interact with the model. The interface consist of input objects,
(sliders, knobs, input fields, etc), and outputs like graphs and table.
A dashboard or sorts to run the simulation. If an author of such models
wishes to share the model with others, currently they need to direct the user
to download a "player" version of the software to interact with the model.
The application we want to build will allow the author to upload their
work to a website where they can share the interface of their model with
others. An online "player", if you will, that will only require the
end-user to have a web browser with the Flash Player installed. That
said, it's not unreasonable to have the author do the conversion from the
desktop file format into a SWF in a conversion application. I'm leaning
toward this approach, because the final SWF would only need to interact with
the web service to actually run the model, and record the end-users input
decisions. I hope this clarifies things. I welcome others
feedback on the pro/cons of this approach vs a dynamically created
interface.Thanks,Jeremy
On 8/29/06, Paul
Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From:
Jeremy Merritt
To:
flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Sent:
Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:16 PM
Subject:
[flexcoders] Architecture question
Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective
about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an
application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop
application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the
files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got
the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to
add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop
app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y
coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML
file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components
needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup
- or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML
file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to
output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the
Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm
leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the
layout of the UI and all that jazz on the conversion utility. The
resultant SWF would then just communicate with the web service and run the
app. What are your thoughts on this?
Well, I'm really curious as to what it is that
needs a dynamic interface to be built like this.
My first thought was(as you suggest) to
go with an xml transformation to mxml if the UI doesn't need to be rebuilt
every single time, but I'm wary about what the user experience would be -
there would be a delay in doing the transformation and then compiling then
invoking a swf. There may be a better user experience by running a swf, then
reading and interpreting the xml. In the second situation, there's no
recompile andtransformation overhead.
Essentially your application is reading an xml
configuration file from the web servi
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
So it's like two different things...- Creating UI- Using UI (or Sharing with others ?)I am not sure of the software's work flow, but you can still ship default UI as pre-compiled SWFs along with corresponding UI source XML. You can provide a tool to users, where they can customize/personalize/create UIs, view shared UIs by other users or share their UIs. This tool can probably do the compilation in background. This would be more usable solution, in my opinion. When user enters a tool with a intention to create UIs, s/he aware of the work flow there. Where as many users would probably never create UI except using default ones? So they should not face any delays.. No matter how complex the task a product is trying to accomplish, the simple parts of the task should remain simple - Jef Raskin-abdulOn 8/30/06, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, interesting stuff! It's not clear from your description how a given user would choose the right application build for them. I can see two possibilities. 1) A flex front end loads a menu (from a web service) offering a list of application builds to the user (I suppose this might change for different users, or even just be a single choice for each user?). The application UI specifics are then loaded into the flex app and the UI reconfigured. 2) A flex front end loads a menu (as before) but instead of reconfiguring the UI, executes a separate pre-compiled swf that implements the appropriate UI. The pre-compiled swf would have been created when the desktop app generated the configuration info, it would then translate the generated configuration to mxml, invoke the compiler to generate the swf and add the swf reference to the list of apps offered to the user. Both these options would provide a fairly seamless experience for the user, with the only delays being experienced (not by the end user) when generating a new UI using the desktop app. Paul - Original Message - From: Jeremy Merritt To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:08 AM Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question Thanks for the input Paul.The desktop application is a tool to build dynamic models of systems and author an interface for others to interact with the model. The interface consist of input objects, (sliders, knobs, input fields, etc), and outputs like graphs and table. A dashboard or sorts to run the simulation. If an author of such models wishes to share the model with others, currently they need to direct the user to download a player version of the software to interact with the model. The application we want to build will allow the author to upload their work to a website where they can share the interface of their model with others. An online player, if you will, that will only require the end-user to have a web browser with the Flash Player installed. That said, it's not unreasonable to have the author do the conversion from the desktop file format into a SWF in a conversion application. I'm leaning toward this approach, because the final SWF would only need to interact with the web service to actually run the model, and record the end-users input decisions. I hope this clarifies things. I welcome others feedback on the pro/cons of this approach vs a dynamically created interface.Thanks,Jeremy On 8/29/06, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jeremy Merritt To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:16 PM Subject: [flexcoders] Architecture question Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup - or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the layout of the UI and all
[flexcoders] Architecture question
Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup - or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the layout of the UI and all that jazz on the conversion utility. The resultant SWF would then just communicate with the web service and run the app. What are your thoughts on this?Thanks,Jeremy __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Software development tool Software development Software development services Home design software Software development company YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
- Original Message - From: Jeremy Merritt To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:16 PM Subject: [flexcoders] Architecture question Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup - or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the layout of the UI and all that jazz on the conversion utility. The resultant SWF would then just communicate with the web service and run the app. What are your thoughts on this? Well, I'm really curious as to what it is that needs a dynamic interface to be built like this. My first thought was(as you suggest) to go with an xml transformation to mxml if the UI doesn't need to be rebuilt every single time, but I'm wary about what the user experience would be - there would be a delay in doing the transformation and then compiling then invoking a swf. There may be a better user experience by running a swf, then reading and interpreting the xml. In the second situation, there's no recompile andtransformation overhead. Essentially your application is reading an xml configuration file from the web service, then configuring itself. Paul Thanks,Jeremy __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Web site design development Computer software development Software design and development Macromedia flex Software development best practice YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
But why not make the SWF creation part of installation. During installation or first run, you create all SWFs from those desktop files.Why not ship just pre-compiled SWFs, why shipping XML, if UI is always same ? -abdulOn 8/30/06, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jeremy Merritt To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:16 PM Subject: [flexcoders] Architecture question Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup - or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the layout of the UI and all that jazz on the conversion utility. The resultant SWF would then just communicate with the web service and run the app. What are your thoughts on this? Well, I'm really curious as to what it is that needs a dynamic interface to be built like this. My first thought was(as you suggest) to go with an xml transformation to mxml if the UI doesn't need to be rebuilt every single time, but I'm wary about what the user experience would be - there would be a delay in doing the transformation and then compiling then invoking a swf. There may be a better user experience by running a swf, then reading and interpreting the xml. In the second situation, there's no recompile andtransformation overhead. Essentially your application is reading an xml configuration file from the web service, then configuring itself. Paul Thanks,Jeremy __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Web site design development Computer software development Software design and development Macromedia flex Software development best practice YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
Thanks for the input Paul.The desktop application is a tool to build dynamic models of systems and author an interface for others to interact with the model. The interface consist of input objects, (sliders, knobs, input fields, etc), and outputs like graphs and table. A dashboard or sorts to run the simulation. If an author of such models wishes to share the model with others, currently they need to direct the user to download a player version of the software to interact with the model. The application we want to build will allow the author to upload their work to a website where they can share the interface of their model with others. An online player, if you will, that will only require the end-user to have a web browser with the Flash Player installed. That said, it's not unreasonable to have the author do the conversion from the desktop file format into a SWF in a conversion application. I'm leaning toward this approach, because the final SWF would only need to interact with the web service to actually run the model, and record the end-users input decisions. I hope this clarifies things. I welcome others feedback on the pro/cons of this approach vs a dynamically created interface.Thanks,JeremyOn 8/29/06, Paul Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jeremy Merritt To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:16 PM Subject: [flexcoders] Architecture question Hi all,I would like some feedback from the group collective about the approach I'm thinking about taking to implementing an application using Flex for the UI.There is an existing desktop application and the goal of the new application is to be able to run the files created by the desktop app in a web browser. We've already got the guts of the desktop app implemented as a web service -- now we need to add UI. So here is the question: the files output by the desktop app have XML that marks up the interface, complete with x and y coordinates. What would work best? - To have a generic MXML file that uses ActionScript to parse the XML and create the components needed for the UI on the fly and lay them out according to the XML markup - or-- To create a conversion utility that creates an MXML file based on the desktop app's XML and then invoke the Flex compiler to output an SWF. This approach would require me to redistribute the Flex SDK, which seems to be okay according to the license. I'm leaning toward the latter option as it puts the burden of figuring out the layout of the UI and all that jazz on the conversion utility. The resultant SWF would then just communicate with the web service and run the app. What are your thoughts on this? Well, I'm really curious as to what it is that needs a dynamic interface to be built like this. My first thought was(as you suggest) to go with an xml transformation to mxml if the UI doesn't need to be rebuilt every single time, but I'm wary about what the user experience would be - there would be a delay in doing the transformation and then compiling then invoking a swf. There may be a better user experience by running a swf, then reading and interpreting the xml. In the second situation, there's no recompile andtransformation overhead. Essentially your application is reading an xml configuration file from the web service, then configuring itself. Paul Thanks,Jeremy -- isee systems, inc.www.iseesystems.com(603) 448-4990 __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Software development tool Software development Software development services Home design software Software development company YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
Re: [flexcoders] Architecture question
The UI is not always the same. The owners of the software can create any UI they wish.What we want to offer is a way to share the UI they create with others, over the web. On 8/29/06, Abdul Qabiz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But why not make the SWF creation part of installation. During installation or first run, you create all SWFs from those desktop files.Why not ship just pre-compiled SWFs, why shipping XML, if UI is always same ? -abdul,_._,___ __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Software development tool Software development Software development services Home design software Software development company YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "flexcoders" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. __,_._,___
