Solving the multiple string value problem:

This: <j:TextButton text="PRIMARY" className="myCustomStyle some other"
primary="true"/>

*<button type="button" class="jewel button textbutton myCustomStyle some
other primary" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px; display:
block;">PRIMARY</button>*

with this change

COMPILE::JS
protected function setClassName(value:String):void
{
var classes:Array = value.split(" ");
element.classList.add.apply(element.classList, classes);
}

I think this was all the problems we have right?


2018-03-13 13:20 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>:

> Hi Piotr,
>
> that's one of the advantages of a collection, order doesn't matter! :)
>
> <j:TextButton text="PRIMARY" className="myCustomStyle" primary="true"/>
>
> output:
>
> *<button type="button" class="jewel button textbutton myCustomStyle
> primary" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px; display: block;">PRIMARY</button>*
>
> this is one of the reason to change, since you'll end trying to figure
> what comes in first or not.
>
> Do you need more evidence?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> 2018-03-13 12:48 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
>
>> 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
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Reply via email to