The biggest problem with FXG is that there are no editors that support it. I kept using Illustrator CS5 for creating all my assets. While I don't have a problem with that or a need to upgrade to the latest version, it will be hard to ask users to use that version for their FlexJS/Royale skinning needs. Adobe makes it very hard for people to find and download those versions as well.
Going forward, CSS3 and SVG would be a very good alternative for us. It is widely supported and easy for our users to incorporate in their workflow. Thanks, Om On Oct 16, 2017 9:05 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote: > IIRC, Om was working on this to some degree. One plan was to convert FXG > to SVG. > > AIUI, a SkinnableContainer wouldn't be that hard. Container already has > an inner div to hold the children, so a different view could have the > outer div display SVG behind the children. I think there were more > questions about SkinnableComponent because not every component is already > implemented to support a skin by default, and SVG as a backgroundImage for > some HTMLElements don't work well in all browsers. > > Flex Skinning was pretty expensive because it added a UIComponent child to > every component. Because we are PAYG, we don't want to force that on > everyone, and as the MDL work showed, CSS Themes may be just as good at > creating nice visual experiences and more standard/common. But as Yishay > said, in theory, a new set of views could add that extra DIV behind each > component if that's what it takes to implement SVG "skins". And we also > know from MDL and Flat that we can also just re-factor components into > enough pieces that they can have a different look. > > Of course, I could be wrong... > -Alex > > On 10/16/17, 6:50 AM, "Peter Ent" <p...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote: > > >We need to have a "skinning story" - something about alternate views, CSS, > >that sort of thing. Adding to my list. > >‹peter > > > >On 10/16/17, 2:29 AM, "yishayw" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >>I like it. > >> > >> > >>> There is no direct equivalent of SkinnableContainer in Royale (at this > >>> time). A reasonable alternative is the Container. > >> > >>Maybe we could mention that Royale components typically have views which > >>can > >>be used to control appearance without changing behavior. To me, spark > >>skins > >>sort of played the same role. > >> > >> > >> > >>-- > >>Sent from: > >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-ro > >>y > >>ale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C% > 7C1f660ab8e3b74b1c > >>a > >>0b108d5145f4fd8%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636437321952 > >>4 > >>70504&sdata=ueXDGjTEy4hq0kzF9w1P3utRy%2B805PEm54F7P9ZceZ8%3D&reserved=0 > > > >
