Hi, we talked about that at some time. One option was not using all the fully qualified name, but use just some sort name that could identify it without problems. Instead of "Button", we'll have "basic-button", "express-button", "mx-button", "jewel-button" and so on...
El lun., 16 dic. 2019 a las 10:00, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>) escribió: > > > On 12/15/19, 9:56 PM, "Harbs" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Remind me why the button CSS is compiled as Button{} rather than > .Button{}? > > IIRC, because we can. The selectors named after components (Button, > TextInput, DataGrid, etc) were implemented as Type Selectors in Flex, so we > were trying to approximate Type Selectors in Royale. Using Button's actual > TypeSelector saves us the code and cycles of assigning a class selector > name to each Button. > > I'm not sure how many plain Buttons are instantiated in Royale's Basic > components, so in a custom theme, you might be able to not use Button Type > Selector and put copies of what is there in the subclasses (TextButton, > CloseButton, etc). > > That said, just the other day I was pondering the cost of using fully > qualified names instead of short names (org_apache_royale_html_Button, > instead of Button). > > HTH, > -Alex > > > On Dec 16, 2019, at 1:55 AM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > The CSS referenced appears to be in the Basic theme, not the Basic > SWC. Did you try using a different theme? > > > > -Alex > > > > On 12/15/19, 1:09 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Well, others are in the same problem using excluded css hack. > You're ok > > since you're using specifically the UI Set that is in the library > that all > > other UI sets must use ;) > > > > Anyway, I thought all the fixes in the compiler discussed was > already in > > place. > > > > El dom., 15 dic. 2019 a las 19:36, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > escribió: > > > >> I think we spoke about fixing this in the compiler. Moving Basic to > a > >> separate library would not solve this case because I’m actually > using Basic. > >> > >>> On Dec 15, 2019, at 8:15 PM, Carlos Rovira < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Harbs, > >>> > >>> I think we should move Basic components along with its CSS to its > own > >>> library. The same as we need to separate MXRoyale/SparkRoyale from > >>> HTTPSerice, RemoteObject or Validator (to say something) and other > "non > >>> visual classes". I started the latter effort some months ago as we > >>> discussed in list, but I must left since I runned out of time to > that > >>> at the moment, and was no easy task to do, but hope to separate in > libs > >> one > >>> day. > >>> > >>> Aboutt Basic: Actualy Basic lib should have just the code that is > needed > >>> for the rest of UI Sets, but not an UI Set that some people will > never > >> use. > >>> I mean mainly TLCs and its CSS defs. > >>> > >>> Since we have Jewel UI Set, MDL UI Set, Express UI Set, I think > Basic > >>> should be the name of the library and have another name for the > >>> common/foundation code for the rest of UI Sets. My proposal is to > call > >> it : > >>> Foundation.swc or Common.swc > >>> > >>> In the meantime you can use the "exclude css hack". But that > shouldn't be > >>> the final goal (as I said is just a hack), just a way to jump over > the > >>> problem for now. I had this on an app that uses MXRoyale just for > >>> RemoteObject communication and some validators and other utility > classes. > >>> Without that the styles are messed between Jewel and MXRoyale. > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> Carlos > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> El dom., 15 dic. 2019 a las 12:47, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > >> escribió: > >>> > >>>> We just ran into the problem of components stepping on each other > again. > >>>> > >>>> We have both a Basic Button and a Button from another component > set in > >> our > >>>> app. Basic css causes the following css to be written: > >>>> > >>>> Button { > >>>> background-color: #f8f8f8; > >>>> border-radius: 2px; > >>>> border: 1px solid #808080; > >>>> margin: 0px; > >>>> padding: 4px; > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Button:hover { > >>>> background-color: #e8e8e8; > >>>> border: 1px solid #808080; > >>>> padding: 4px; > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Button:active { > >>>> background-color: #d8d8d8; > >>>> border: 1px solid #808080; > >>>> padding: 4px; > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Considering these are selector css rather than class CSS, the css > is > >>>> changing the default css for our components which are set using > class > >> names. > >>>> > >>>> We’ve discussed this problem in the past and I’m not sure what > the end > >>>> plan (which was never implemented) was… > >>>> > >>>> FWIW, we’re changing the styling in our app, and we’re probably > getting > >>>> rid of basic buttons completely, but it’s going to be a process… > >>>> > >>>> Thoughts? > >>>> Harbs > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Carlos Rovira > >>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf37fa85524c74af9591d08d781ecb5fd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120726022091522&sdata=%2BkI7zba9Dr3AMcdqdlPX8ip%2FjzWZjNiYPh5C4YkY7Hk%3D&reserved=0 > < > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf37fa85524c74af9591d08d781ecb5fd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120726022091522&sdata=%2BkI7zba9Dr3AMcdqdlPX8ip%2FjzWZjNiYPh5C4YkY7Hk%3D&reserved=0 > > > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf37fa85524c74af9591d08d781ecb5fd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120726022091522&sdata=%2BkI7zba9Dr3AMcdqdlPX8ip%2FjzWZjNiYPh5C4YkY7Hk%3D&reserved=0 > < > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf37fa85524c74af9591d08d781ecb5fd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637120726022091522&sdata=%2BkI7zba9Dr3AMcdqdlPX8ip%2FjzWZjNiYPh5C4YkY7Hk%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
