Ean, Maybe 2 sections, if you would want to extend your effort with Boostrap? The idea is to gather work force, you should not be alone. Jonatan for instance also expressed an interest about this feature http://markmail.org/message/i7fnxid55cq5uiiz Adrian suggested that an external framework would not be necessary but it seems he spoke only about ecommerce I think we should think also (only for now?) about backend
Jonatan, I added you at the section Theme framework (Bootstrap, Zurb, etc.) integration (for both back and frontend) Jacques On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:26 PM, jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote > Ean should I create a specific section for this feature (please name it), and > would you be interested to help? > > Jacques > > On Monday, January 06, 2014 7:09 PM, e...@brainfood.com wrote >> I agree that we should migrate FTL templates to ofbiz widgets for the sake >> of consistency throughout the interfaces. However, I do have to say that >> I would not use form widgets to develop a customer facing site. At this >> point, Brainfood is pretty much at a consensus that we do not want to do >> "page template" oriented development in the server at all. When you look at >> applications like Google Maps it becomes clear that the "send post, alter >> state, regenerate and send page" workflow is incredibly limited. The future >> seems to look a lot more like applications written in Javascript that >> generate HTML directly in the browser. >> >> So, for us, the important feature is the JSON-RPC interface for this remote >> applications. It would be genuinely interesting if we could write a client >> side form widget interpreter that would delegate generation of the interface >> to the client side and then supply the "action" interface via AJAX. That is >> something we would be very interested in. >> >> Refactoring the widget generation code to support greater modularity in the >> HTML >> could be another target of such an effort. I made some modest efforts towards >> a Bootstrap based OFBiz theme and I found it difficult to make progress with >> the >> current setup. >> >> ----- "Gavin Mabie" <kwikst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It appears that the citing of Drupal/WordPress/Magento solicited quite >>> a >>> lot of comment. It's a side issue really and whether some houses >>> prefer to >>> integrate existing solutions is besides the point. More importantly, >>> most >>> commentators would agree that theme developement in Ofbiz does require >>> more >>> attention. The vast majority of threads on this ML focuss on backend >>> business rules and processes. That in itself is not a problem - if >>> you >>> regard Ofbiz as a Framework only. It only means that, as far as >>> frameworks >>> go, we need a better framework for theming as well. This will >>> encourage >>> more participation from developers who have more of a front-end >>> orientation. I would support a drive towards better "themeability" >>> in >>> 2014. In this regard I would like to suggest that we take a look at >>> the >>> VisualThemeResource entity which currently is currently poorly >>> defined. >>> >>> Gavin
