On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > On 1/10/17, 11:49 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala" > <omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> Let me know what you think. Alex has suggested using the ASDoc example > >>as > >> the starting point. > >> > >> > >I think the MDLExample would be a good scaffolding website. The ASDoc > >example, fontawesome example, etc. can go in each as a tab. > > Designing the top-level will be the fun part ;-). > I think this is a well defined problem that a designer could take on and build a concept. If FlexJS does not support such a design, we just need to go build it. > > The regular Tour De Flex is here [1] It uses a Tree as the top-level. > IMO, that's more scalable than tabs, if I understand what you were > thinking. IOW, a vertical list can show more things than a row of tabs. > To be clear, I didn't mean to suggest starting with ASDoc Example as much > as borrowing the Tree from ASDoc Example as the shell. > The MDLExample has a side drawer. That is what I meant. And then each example type will probably have tabs to show variety. Or maybe just one tab depending on how many examples we want to show for each type. > > IMO, we don't need to match the current Tour De Flex at all in terms of > look-and-feel and content, but I was thinking Tour de FlexJS could have > component sets at the top-level of the tree and maybe some example apps at > the top-level as well. > > I'm also wondering if we should carve out room in the UI for more words to > describe what's going on like in Flex Examples. > Yes, a description along with the MXML code that went into building each example would be very important. More than showing 'FlexJS can do this', showing 'See how easy FlexJS makes this' is critical. > > This might be a good first place to implement non-unloadable modules. > Each "example" could be a module. > +1 > > Thoughts? > -Alex > > [1] http://flex.apache.org/tourdeflex/index.html > >
