Hi Carlos, I cut out portions where we have agreement and am responding to others inline.
On 3/15/18, 10:06 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >HI Alex, > >2018-03-15 17:44 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > >>I am hopeful I have explained the issues well enough that you can go >> refactor JewelTheme into multiple folders and get it all working in >>Maven. >> I just found this article [1] about using install-file to install >> single-file artifacts. Don't know about deploying single-file artifacts >> though. Maybe this will help [2]. So I would like to have you do the >> refactoring. Once you do that, and also adjust JewelTheme to build both >> SWF and JSRoyale targets, your ClassReference issue should go away. >> > >I think as I have the projects setup and running that's ok as well. I need >to remove now common things from blue >and keep only con the common theme. But I think Jewel is not a >single-file, >at least in development, although it generates one .css >so I think is ok for now, at least you think it's not. let me know. for me >is ok in the actual state (just committed few moments ago) If you are saying you will have JewelTheme.swc that contains SVG and assets in one folder and then other folders with only CSS for setting colors that's fine. If you need SVG in in the Blue theme and have to turn it into a SWC as well, that is also fine. The main point was to avoid having blue.css and red.css in the one JewelTheme.swc. > >> >> Regarding supporting other things like Bootstrap, if the sub-trees in >>the >> components for Jewel are the same as the ones in Bootstrap, then >>Bootstrap >> should "just work". Ideally, Bootstrap support isn't critical to Royale >> and we would get noticed for other successes and Bootstrap fans would do >> the work of getting Royale to work with Bootstrap. >> > >Maybe this can be confusing, by supporting I mean creating a theme that >"emulates" those well-known styles >but I can guarantee that we can't use the styles in those projects >directly >(although if we can due to licenses) >in Jewel there's a concrete html structure and each of the before >mentioned >styles use their own, so I think will >be almost imposible to apply directly all of that CSSs. So for a button >I'll must to recreate the look and feel >and even effects (fades, resizes..) to look very similar to what they >have, >but with our own code and css rules >(for example a button in mdl is "mdl-button mdl-buton--js" while in >semantic is "ui button" and so on) > IMO, if we want to support Bootstrap, we should do it by encapsulation their HTML structures, not by trying to emulate their visuals. Then other Bootstrap themes will "just work". Again, Royale is primarily in the business of encapsulating common patterns. If every Bootstrap user must fashion a Button out of a <div> and <label> and <input> and give those tags certain attributes so the Bootstrap CSS will take effect, then a Bootstrap.swc for Royale would contain view beads that generate those tags with those attributes. Another way of thinking about it is to take two different Bootstrap websites, look at the HTML DOM, find the common patterns, and those patterns are what the view bead generates. I thought MDL worked the same way. We are creating our own component set at first just to make debugging simple, but also to make it possible to write really simple HTML that isn't completely styleable and to avoid licensing issues, but now you are creating view beads that set up a particular HTML so you can style it with your CSS. If you love Bootstrap and want to use Bootstrap to get our default Royale look, that's fine with me, as long as you can stay away from licensing issues. My 2 cents, -Alex >
