> Sean, > > I am already familiar with Swing and its design. I was thinking of something > skin based (like NeoPlanet and WinAmp) and cool looking like the Mac OS X > Aqua interface or Stardock's Object Desktop for Windows 2000. > > I could start working on a design. > > Does this plaf need to be based on Swing? The one thing I don't like about > Swing is its deep object hierarchy (for backward compatibility) and its poor > performance (which supposedly has been improved in JDK 1.3). I was more > impressed by the design of IFC. Simple, clean, and fast. > > What do you think? > That's excellent. In fact, there had been discussion of making the PLAF a lower-level function, i.e. plugging them into the AWT-peer level. This will allow users to pick the look of their favorite L&F in all apps, not just Swing ones. Ryan Heise had created something called SwingToolkit that used Swing components to replace AWT peers (but ultimately it relied on native Component peers and bridged the native toolkit). I dabbled in something like that myself, but found it too resource intensive. If we can develop an interface for L&F's at the peer level, we can allow anyone with any graphics hardware and applications to use the L&F's. "Skinnability" (technical term :) is an ultimate goal of mine too. I personally haven't seen the IFC design, but anything would be more lightweight than Swing :). Ultimately, for compatibility reasons, we should port our new L&F to Swing -- this also allows non-JOS users to try out our L&F. Sean _______________________________________________ UI maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
