Hi Piotr, don't worry that was some of things I worried so much when working on MDL, and for that reason I made most of the changes I did at that moment. In Jewel I'll be doing the same ;)
2018-03-12 19:34 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]>: > Subclass, change it and remember to test as I pointed with some custom > className setted in the example. See what happen. > > Looking forward to the results. > Thanks, > Piotr > > 2018-03-12 19:30 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>: > > > Hi Piotr, > > subclass will be most to test the use of element.classList, a part from > the > > reverse order. I think element.classList will remove the need of much > code > > in jewel components about how to setup classes in those components > > > > 2018-03-12 19:27 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]>: > > > > > Since it is some kind of exception which you are trying to resolve, you > > > should create beads (layouts) which indicates resolution for that > > exception > > > in their name. - At least that's how I think about PAYG. > > > > > > Btw. Sub classing UIBase to have an different order in className is a > bit > > > overkill to me. > > > > > > 2018-03-12 19:21 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > Hi Carlos, > > > > > > > > These layout classes have worked fine for dozens of example. They > are > > > > small, simple and stupid. > > > > > > > > I don't understand why, if you want vertical layout, you want to set > a > > > > child's display to "inline-block". That would not layout vertically > > > > unless you are counting in line-wrapping. To me, that is an > exception > > > > case, and extra code and an additional layout class is the PAYG way > to > > > > deal with it. > > > > > > > > To me, there is no excess HTML code because we do not generate much > > HTML > > > > at all! We do run a bunch of JS that creates HTMLElements, but that > is > > > > not tags in an HTML file that has to be parse by the browser, so > other > > > > than some opinion of what is "best", we need to run profiling to > > > determine > > > > the trade-offs. Harbs claims that having JS set the style object is > > > > better than having JS set classnames. You will need to prove him > > wrong. > > > > > > > > And still, I don't believe whether we use the style object or not is > > > going > > > > to cause people to not use Royale. We can clean this up later. > > > > > > > > My 2 cents, > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > On 3/12/18, 11:11 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos > > > Rovira" > > > > <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > >no, I want the normal effect of a vertical layout, since finaly is > get > > > in > > > > >both ways. > > > > >The problem for me is : > > > > > > > > > >1) people that wants to change it must subclass layout to modify, > > > instead > > > > >of override css rule > > > > >2) there's an excess of html code since in each component inside the > > > > >layout > > > > >the current approach with inline styles are generating the style > > > attribute > > > > >for all components, so this ends in bloated code that I don't see in > > any > > > > >example of UI sets out there > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >2018-03-12 18:41 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 3/12/18, 10:11 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of > Carlos > > > > >>Rovira" > > > > >> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> I still don't get why, if your Button is a subcomponent, some > > > > >>framework > > > > >> >> code was setting display style on it unless you were using a > > layout > > > > >> >>class > > > > >> >> in the component itself. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >that's the side effect of inline styling, as I put the button > > inside > > > a > > > > >> >vertical layout, the layout imposes display: block > > > > >> >while my css dictates display: inline-block. The browser shows > the > > > > >>later > > > > >> >strikes out. For me that behavior can be right > > > > >> >if I can change easily from CSS overriding rule, but not if is a > > line > > > > >>of > > > > >> >code inside a framework that makes me override a whole class > > > > >> >to change an inline style. > > > > >> > > > > >> Just to be sure I understand, your goal was to use vertical layout > > but > > > > >> make one child not layout vertically? Sort of like > > "includeInLayout" > > > in > > > > >> Flex? > > > > >> > > > > >> Handling exceptions usually requires more code. So it sounds like > > you > > > > >>are > > > > >> creating layouts that allow for exceptions, which seems like a > > > > >>reasonable > > > > >> thing to do. The existing layouts will be more simple (and > > > essentially > > > > >> stupid) but will do the job with the least code when exceptions > are > > > not > > > > >> needed. > > > > >> > > > > >> That's how I understand it. > > > > >> -Alex > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > > >Carlos Rovira > > > > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > > > > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 > > > > >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% > > > > 7Ccfb1cb035125479752cb08d5 > > > > >8844b0f1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > > > > 7C636564751009995999&s > > > > >data=ULF%2BQF6eX22uPYf%2BgxjeJL6xIzk18iFBhuPI5Wgvwfo%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > -- > > Piotr Zarzycki > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
