Maybe we should have HTML just be the <js:DIV>, <js:H1>, etc. components that were recently introduced. Have HTML5 product be additional HTML5-specific components, and leave Basic to be the original set.
This way you would layer as needed: if you wanted a static-ish HTML page that had dynamics created with ActionScript, then you would use the HTML project. You could then add in jQuery or whatever to that. If you wanted to introduce layouts and more complex UI elements, you would add in Basic. If you didn't need DIV and H1 at all, then you'd just use Basic. I think sorting these into more useful functional groups would help. ‹ Peter Ent Adobe Systems/Apache Flex Project On 12/5/16, 6:26 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: >Hi Sankar > >1. Why the 'Basic' and 'HTML' folders when holding almost same files? >> > >Basic is a deprecated project. When Alex and Harbs made the sprite >refactor >it was disconnected from build. I think Alex is working on it and he said >rest of us could operate with Core, HTML and the rest of projects. So >don't >take account on Basic project > > >> 2. When we call DataItemRenderer in our codes, I noticed it referenced >>from >> /frameworks/libs/HTML.swc - does that mean the swc contains #2 URL file? >> > >If I understand right, yes, DataItemRenderer comes from HTML.swc (is >contained in that library swc) > >-- >Carlos Rovira >http://about.me/carlosrovira
