I'm 99% sure we will be renaming and refactoring - just wanted to separate the component sets. Here's an example:
MainView.mxml: <flexjs:ViewBase xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"; xmlns:flexjs="library://ns.apache.org/flexjs/basic" xmlns:local="*"> <fx:Script> <![CDATA[ private function doesSomething() : void { var newLabel:Label = new Label(); Š addElement(newLabel); } ]]> </fx:Script> <flexjs:Label text="Title Here" /> <flexjs:Button text="Push Me" click="doesSomething()" /> Š </flexjs:ViewBase> In this sample, which is built using the basic components (which, for now, maps to the staticControls set by the basic-manifest.xml) the Button creates a new Label and maybe some other stuff. Now suppose you want to switch over to the more complex controls offered in the dyanmicControls package. You simply change the flexjs namespace: xmlns:flexjs="library://ns.apache.org/flexjs/dynamic" or whatever it will be called. The point is you can switch component packages or, if you want to mix them, do that as well (although you will need to fully qualify them to avoid ambiguity). Anyway, just some ideas to put out there. --peter On 10/10/13 7:52 AM, "Tom Chiverton" <t...@extravision.com> wrote: >On 09/10/2013 19:33, Peter Ent wrote: >> "staticControls". The intent of this package was to have controls >>that were relatively simple and had direct or close approximation with >>HTML elements. >In which case I think the name is confusing. They are just as dynamic in >terms of data binding as the other ones, right ? >Maybe 'baseControls' or 'basicControls' is better? 'directHtmlControls' ? > >Tom
