So you are suggesting a RemoteObject is a headless component who's base class only supports the model and controller plugins and that UI classes extend the headless component to add in the view?
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 15:52, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > IMHO, not always a "strand" is a "visual component". This relation is not > always true. a strand could be a non visual component (for example the > implementation of RemoteObject in the Network library). And a bead could be > a strand itself. > > I think the term component is right in most cases and accomplish a meaning > purpose, but strand/beads concept comes to give another subset of meaning > > just my opinion about this. > > Carlos > > > > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 9:23, Chris Velevitch (<chris.velevi...@gmail.com>) > escribió: > > > The use of the terms "strands" and "beads" still doesn't make sense to > > me because they are concepts I have never heard before and it is > > creating a barrier to acceptance and deepens the learning curve. As > > far as I can tell, it's something to do with visual/UI components. > > > > The section "Strands and Beads" should ideally be titled "Visual > > Components" because that section is about visual components and is > > alluding to the fact visual components are standalone microcosms of > > the MVC pattern and the ability to treat the model, view and > > controller as plugins to the component. The statement that components > > are "strands" is, in my mind, misleading because it doesn't make sense > > to interchange terms components and strands if a strand is a > > component. In fact, diving into the code, the "addBead" function gives > > the "bead" a reference to the component the "bead" is being added to. > > > > It is clear from the documentation that "beads" are "plugins" and the > > documentation should be talking about extending components with > > plugins. All references to "bead" should be replaced with "plugin" and > > all references to "strand" be replaced with either "hostComponent", or > > "parent" or appropriately something else. > > > > We seem to be neglecting the rich heritage that we have gotten from > > Adobe Flex and I don't see the point giving existing concepts new > > names. > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira -- Chris -- Chris Velevitch m: 0415 469 095
