In my example orders matters. Setup first className than your property.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018, 12:39 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Carlos, > > I definitely appreciate the work you are doing. I’m swamped with work > right now, so I don’t have the time to spend helping you. (Sorry about > that.) :-( > > I think the discussions here are about pretty minor points. You can > certainly implement jewel how you think makes sense, but if you want to > make changes to basic in areas which are not broken, there needs to be a > really good reason to do so. > > My $0.02, > Harbs > > On Mar 13, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Hi Piotr, > > > > thanks for your words, but is difficult to work on something when you > > believe in your vision and others no, and more over when all the facts > you > > see corroborates that vision. It's difficult to maintain live the moto in > > that scenario. > > > > but anyway for you Kindly words > > > > Carlos > > > > > > 2018-03-13 12:21 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>: > > > >> Carlos, > >> > >> In my opinion you are not facing the wall from US. You are facing the > wall > >> from lack of volounteers who can help, do the job. > >> Believe me your Jewel effort in my list of tasks is almost on the Top. I > >> have to fiinish planned work in TranspiledActionScript first and I hope > to > >> join. > >> > >> When it will be - maybe in couple of weeks. In the end something have to > >> pay the bills and Royale is only fraction of that. > >> > >> I contribute in other related areas. I Wish I could contribute in your > way > >> or Alex and Peter. > >> > >> Thanks for your work! > >> Piotr > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018, 12:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I personally said - Go and try, report back. I have gave you an real > >> world > >>> examples where classList failed. Try and post the results. > >>> > >>> 2018-03-13 11:49 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> it's very hard to me to invest lot of time both in tryin to develop > >>>> something useful in the look and feel field for us where no other is > >> doing > >>>> work, trying to explain and discuss all issues I find without get any > >>>> traction. It's like to face a wall all the time. > >>>> > >>>> Maybe I'm wrong with my proposals but other times my perception is > that > >>>> things are settled in a particular way > >>>> and we don't want to change it since is working in the current state. > >> But > >>>> I > >>>> think we always where thinking of change things as we evolve Royale. > >> We're > >>>> in a 0.9.2 release, we're not in 1.0, but the way we're managing all > >>>> issues > >>>> seems to > >>>> me that we're fine with what we have now and we are freezing the API. > >>>> > >>>> In all the issues raised last days only CSS compiler errors are real > >> bugs, > >>>> since without that fixes royale can't output concrete CSS rules (I > think > >>>> those not require any discussion) > >>>> > >>>> The font injection is maybe another bug (don't know why a class in a > >> theme > >>>> is not "visible" by the final app), but can be workarounded with an > html > >>>> that setup the font for now. > >>>> > >>>> Things like classNames discussion are not critical (I know), it's > just a > >>>> matter to refine the API since I had problems each time I go that > path, > >>>> first with MDL and now with Jewel. Maybe I'm the only one since no > other > >>>> has tried what I'm trying to do: Creating Themes. > >>>> > >>>> In my opinion, give the users only a way to manage classNames vía > >> string, > >>>> is insufficient and cumbersome and deserves at a minimun some API > >> methods > >>>> since is an important point in how UI is stylized, and how controls > and > >>>> objects in html can be "extended" or diferenciated (Alex explained > very > >>>> well the importance of this in the typenames thread). So some API to > >> ease > >>>> that is for me very Wellcome since I'm doing that work, and will be > more > >>>> users doing that work. In this point, I don't think we should shield > us > >> in > >>>> things like PAYG or if that is a bit less performant. > >>>> > >>>> To close and avoid having much discussion to not reach to some > valuable > >>>> point: I can try to go with what we have, but makes me feel not so > good > >>>> about the continuous rejection of my proposals. As well, you are > saying > >>>> that we should wait to what users demand...but I'm an user of the API, > >> and > >>>> my perception as a "zero user" seems to be not valuable. Since I don't > >> get > >>>> traction on this, I'll try to continue with what we have and report > back > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 2018-03-13 9:24 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> +1. > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am so sad and frustrated that we have spent so much time on > >>>> managing a > >>>>>> set of strings. I just don't think we have the people power to > >>>> continue > >>>>>> to seek perfection until it is truly needed by a user. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> 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 > >
