2009/6/5 Adrian Crum <[email protected]> > > It's an interesting idea, and you would have to provide some patches or > something to demonstrate it.
OK, I will try to provide some patches about this with the trunk. > > The existing connector library has a very simple API - the functions accept > HTML element references and CSV strings. I can't see why that can't be > adapted to other JS libraries. I'm trying to make it work with the dojo, and will create patches about this if I finished. > > If the tree structure is the only obstacle, then let's discuss it further. > I am sure we can all collaborate on a solution. > > -Adrian > > --- On Thu, 6/4/09, guo weizhan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: guo weizhan <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: Use Prototype or JQuery for Ajax goodies > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Thursday, June 4, 2009, 8:58 PM > > I notice that. but It's not easy to > > change to other lib. > > > > How about this: > > > > We make those js files as the VisualThemeResource, and we > > can implement the > > function with the ajax lib we want and replace those files > > easily. > > > > I think the selectall.js can do in this way, in fact we > > have try to do this, > > we change the pop up way and others. But the complicated > > component is > > difficult to do this, take the tree for example, the data > > structure using by > > different ajax lib is different, like the last dojo version > > don't support > > inline data structure, we have to generate a special data > > store for dojo, I > > don't know there is a common way for those complicated > > component yet. > > > > 2009/6/4 Adrian Crum <[email protected]> > > > > > In the current trunk, selectall.js, starting at line > > 211 there are some JS > > > functions that use Prototype. The widgets call those > > functions - they don't > > > use Prototype directly. > > > > > > -Adrian > > > > > > > > > guo weizhan wrote: > > > > > >> Can you explain more about the connector library? > > >> > > >> > > >> 2009/6/4 Adrian Crum <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> The existing widget-Ajax code does that. The > > widgets call JS functions in > > >>> a > > >>> "connector library" - which uses Prototype. > > Someone wanting to use a > > >>> different toolkit can replace the connector > > library. > > >>> > > >>> -Adrian > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Brett Palmer wrote: > > >>> > > >>> I agree with Al. > > >>>> > > >>>> We need to provide an abstraction layer to > > allow developers to > > >>>> integrate their favorite AJAX library with > > the existing screen widget > > >>>> technology. This may mean the widget > > is rendered in the browser > > >>>> rather than the server as many of the MVC > > operations move to the > > >>>> client in AJAX tool kits, but it would be > > nice to have a standard way > > >>>> to represent those UI's in a generic > > syntax that works across > > >>>> technologies. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Brett > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Al Byers > > <[email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Before we choose a UI library, it > > might be better to determine what > > >>>>> sort > > >>>>> of > > >>>>> advanced screens and features we are > > shooting for (eg. trees, > > >>>>> master/detail, > > >>>>> heirarchical menus, etc.) so that we > > can enhance the widget > > >>>>> architecture > > >>>>> to > > >>>>> handle them. Then the widget component > > can act as a common definition > > >>>>> language for front-end systems built > > on different libraries. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> When it comes to front-ends, I think > > we should try to separate them > > >>>>> from > > >>>>> the > > >>>>> rest of OFBiz, as people get very > > religious about them. I have spent > > >>>>> almost > > >>>>> a year and a half with Dojo and liken > > it to the amount of time it took > > >>>>> to > > >>>>> become familiar with OFBiz (which is > > going on 8 years). I doubt that I > > >>>>> would > > >>>>> switch because OFBiz decided to go > > with one library on another. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -Al > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >> > > > > > >
