I was thinking that a Dreamweaver plugin would make WebObjects more corporate friendly. Maybe there is a second tier company that would like to step up to the plate... Softpress' Freeway or such? Seems like it could be in their best interest too.- JamesOn Sep 6, 2006, at 5:41 PM, Thomas wrote:I'd b
Nice job Marc... thanks!
Dino
On Sep 7, 2006, at 9:13, Marc Oesch wrote:
Hello,
I just tried to collect the ideas of the past few days here:
http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WO+Builder+Ideas
and
http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WO+Builder+Tasks
The second pa
Hello,
I just tried to collect the ideas of the past few days here:
http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WO+Builder+Ideas
and
http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WO+Builder+Tasks
The second page is mostly empty at this time for obvious reasons...I
hope this will chang
4 the BBC: "the WOComunity wooed all e-commerce consumers with
their amazing open source tools"
... not to mention that our news and sport web sites are entirely
produced using those self-same family of tools.
Rgds
Garrick McFarlane
Technical Lead, Content Production System
BBC News, Londo
On 6 Sep 2006, at 23:41, Thomas wrote:We need an editor that, like WOBuilder, displays the organisation of the component, not the way it will be rendered in a browser.+1 ___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mail
I really like WOVE for the visual editor, and for the whole set of
tools, a good one would be simply WOO or WOOS (with several obvious
meanings); so we could use sentences like the following.
4 developers: "woo your clients!"
4 clients: "woo your web-visitors!"
4 the BBC: "the WOComunity wooe
My humble opinion,
All WO technology, should be integrated into something that I would
like to call:
/web
"slash web"
David Sánchez
On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:26 PM, James Cicenia wrote:
WOOD
Web Objects Oriented Development
lol
On Sep 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Ricardo Strausz wrote:
dire
WOODWeb Objects Oriented DevelopmentlolOn Sep 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Ricardo Strausz wrote: direct.. "wove": Web Objects View EditorUse wove to weave your web :) WOve could be better stated as Web Objects Visual Editor, but I wentwith the MVC bit initially. +1"All you need is wove, la la la la la"+1
direct.. "wove": Web Objects View Editor Use wove to weave your web :) WOve could be better stated as Web Objects Visual Editor, but I went with the MVC bit initially. +1"All you need is wove, la la la la la"+1 Dino ___
Do not post admin requests to
On 07/09/2006, at 9:14, Paul Lynch wrote:
To be honest, I could lose the visual web page builder aspect of
WOBuilder, so long as this side is preserved. Of course, I would
rather not.
I heavily rely on the visual display of the relationships of the
components on the page: this is inside
Well said on both counts.
On 07/09/2006, at 9:02, Jerry W. Walker wrote:
The WOBuilder replacement should, however, have a Source and Layout
view and allow the same (or better) ease of switching back and
forth between the two views with selections of components from
either view carrying in
On 7 Sep 2006, at 00:02, Jerry W. Walker wrote:
I also think WOBuilder's object browser is valuable. The ability to
see the keys of the WOComponent Java class file (and the Session
and Application class files) and be able to visually link them to
the subcomponent and element bindings is gr
On Sep 6, 2006, at 6:41 PM, Thomas wrote:
I'd be happy to contribute the fee previously discussed, and
contribute my time for design discussions and testing of the
WOBuilder replacement.
But we do NOT need a WYSIWYG WOBuilder replacement.
We need an editor that, like WOBuilder, displays th
I'd be happy to contribute the fee previously discussed, and contribute my time for design discussions and testing of the WOBuilder replacement.But we do NOT need a WYSIWYG WOBuilder replacement.We need an editor that, like WOBuilder, displays the organisation of the component, not the way it will
- a plugin for DreamWeaver (akin to the Lasso plugin)Personally, I don't want to buy & learn this.+1- a Eclipse pluginThat could work, I don't know what useful support there is.Has anyone used eZingBuilder ? it's a wysiwyg html editor eclipse plugin for tapestry.http://ezingbuilder.sourceforge.net
On Sep 5, 2006, at 3:33 PM, Joe Little wrote:
direct.. "wove": Web Objects View Editor
Use wove to weave your web :)
WOve could be better stated as Web Objects Visual Editor, but I went
with the MVC bit initially.
+1
--
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:25 AM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Le 06-09-04, à 18:00, M. Blanc a écrit :
On 4 Sep 2006, at 17:28, Marc Oesch wrote:
And I wanted to ask if anybody is actually thinking about a
replacement for WOBuilder or already working on it ?
We should also make a list of how it can be d
Le 06-09-04, à 18:00, M. Blanc a écrit :
On 4 Sep 2006, at 17:28, Marc Oesch wrote:
And I wanted to ask if anybody is actually thinking about a
replacement for WOBuilder or already working on it ?
We should also make a list of how it can be done. I think the options
are :
- a plugin fo
Hello,
So WOBuilder... maybe we should create a fund for it?
James
That was an idea I was going to post :)
Sure we can wait for Apple to release more information as announced in their
e-mail.
So there is a wishlist - as mbj already started - where everyone might
collect their
top wishes - or
I personally believe there should be a stack that includes Wonder... so
I am sticking with my two:
Wonderland
Wonderlust
at least people will "wonder" and not feel "woe".
And all the lipstick stuff... well... whatever.
So WOBuilder... maybe we should create a fund for it?
James
On Sep 5, 200
On 9/5/06, Joe Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/5/06, Karl Gretton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only danger of using Eclipstick is that someone might come up
> with something to suggest that we are trying to put lipstick on the
> PIG...which WO clearly is NOT!
>
> I personally liked thi
On 9/5/06, Karl Gretton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only danger of using Eclipstick is that someone might come up
with something to suggest that we are trying to put lipstick on the
PIG...which WO clearly is NOT!
I personally liked this cover: http://static.flickr.com/
70/197986751_d4bd745e2c
The only danger of using Eclipstick is that someone might come up
with something to suggest that we are trying to put lipstick on the
PIG...which WO clearly is NOT!
I personally liked this cover: http://static.flickr.com/
70/197986751_d4bd745e2c_m.jpg
We should surely come up with a .NET v
On Sep 4, 2006, at 3:00 PM, M. Blanc wrote:
On 4 Sep 2006, at 17:28, Marc Oesch wrote:
And I wanted to ask if anybody is actually thinking about a
replacement for WOBuilder or already working on it ?
I'm all for having babies –I personally had three, though my wife
helped a lot– so I ca
On 4 Sep 2006, at 17:28, Marc Oesch wrote:
And I wanted to ask if anybody is actually thinking about a
replacement for WOBuilder or already working on it ?
I'm all for having babies –I personally had three, though my wife
helped a lot– so I can tell you from experience that the very first
25 matches
Mail list logo
