Hi Alex, ok, seems logical, and as you say maybe is better to move model to UIBase. I think that's something better for someone like you that could considere all the impacts sometime, when some revision of the codebase will be done.
thanks El mié., 24 oct. 2018 a las 1:49, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>) escribió: > The SWF implementation doesn't wrap HTMLElements (or any element really), > the SWF UIBase "is" the display object/element. So UIBase has a different > ancestry of classes on different platforms, which I think is a good thing. > It requires less code than building up some abstraction layer, plus it > makes sure we don't make assumptions in our code and tools. > > So I think that part doesn't need to change. What could change is maybe > HTMLElementWrapper on JS shouldn't have a model property and it should also > be on UIBase, but we'd have to see what other kinds of things > HTMLElementWrapper is used for. It's been a while since anyone has looked > there, IIRC. > > -Alex > > On 10/23/18, 1:45 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > I what to say that if this design (SWF implementation in a class and JS > implementation in a super class) was done by design and the current > state > is the pursued design API goal, or was left as is since until now > nobody > think about refactor it. In other words, would have sense to move SWF > model > implementation from UIBase to HTMLElementWrapper? or it's ok to have > it as > is since it was the designed purpose. (btw, for me is ok if we left as > is, > just asking) > > thanks > > > > El mar., 23 oct. 2018 a las 8:01, Alex Harui (<[email protected] > >) > escribió: > > > > > > > On 10/22/18, 2:22 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > ok, I never though we have separate a property for different > platforms > > in > > different classes. In fact seems a bit strange to me... is this > done > > intentionally? > > > > Not sure what you mean by "intentionally". In JS, there was some > common > > code between wrapping HTMLElements and other things like XHR, so for > JS, > > the model was put in HTMLElementWrapper. Not sure if that's still > the case > > or not. > > > > -Alex > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C478dc6a2e6284f8955d508d638c3d976%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636758811155138779&sdata=lRCgkxIcX1%2Fo%2B%2FgWwtG4ZjElWjXgxF64M1%2BUpM3pubU%3D&reserved=0 > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
