On 04/22/2010 09:29 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:35, Jerome Velociter<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Denis,
>>
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> We have a customer request for highlighting the filters that are
>> currently
>>> applied on a livetable. The rationale of this, is that sometimes the
>>> filtered table is empty or unexpected by the user, but he does not notice
>>> that a filter is currently applied. We have written a proposed
>>> implementation as well and you may also see what it looks like in the
>>> attached screenshot, for both text field and select box (for webkit).
>>>
>>> Currently, I choose yto use the "background highlight color" of the
>> active
>>> color theme, but my feeling is that adding another highlight color would
>>> be
>>> better.
>>
>> I agree
>
>
> Well, since I have not followed what have been discuss regarding the color
> theme, what would be the process to add a new color in it ? How do we expect
> to manage the evolution of the color theme to avoid it to became cluttered ?
> Should we open a discussion on that if none have been already ?
Color themes should be kept small, so that it's easy to design a new
color theme, and it keeps things in harmony. And, another aspect is that
different elements of the wiki should use similar colors, so that the UI
is familiar. We have a highlight color so that users can remember it and
recognize a highlight no matter where it appears. And I really don't
think that a skin that uses all the colors of the rainbow would look
nice and would really be useful. Thus, when designing the components of
the color theme, we tried to use as few as possible, while still
allowing creativity. When a color is not enough, remember that you can
still create variations of it by playing with the opacity (this is what
we did for the poll to simulate disabled colors).
>
>>>
>>> I have also hook to events separately from the "main" refresh handler,
>>> because I do not understand the implementation of this handler. Why using
>>> an
>>> intermediate makeRefreshHandler, and why it does not properly provide the
>>> currently changed filter to the handler ? Could or should I change that ?
>>
>> Yes you can. The refresh handler should probably not return a function but
>> be a livetable function that is bound as event listener, i.e :
>>
>> this.handleRefresh.bindAsEventListener(this)
>>
>> versus the current
>>
>> this.makeRefreshHandler(this)
>>
>> This way you will be able to access the event from the handler, thus the
>> filter that triggered it.
>>
>
> Ok, I will adapt my implementation and the current code.
>
>
>> One last thing : you should not need the try {} catch {} statements in
>> your code. I don't see where it could fail (and if it could, I think it's
>> better to try to fix it so that it does not happen). Try catch blocks IMO
>> should be used only in very specific occasions (for example when you know
>> code can fail under certain circumstances, but you don't want to stop the
>> execution). Anyway that's just my opinion, we've never stated on this as a
>> best practice, but we can discuss it in another thread if needed. I'd be
>> curious to get input from Sergiu about this for example.
>>
>
> I agree. My habits was that minor JS function (those that do not impact
> usability) should never ever crash, so I usually protect them with try/catch
> in all cases. This is maybe overkill here. Should we also open a discusion
> on this best practice ? Sergiu ?
I agree that JS code should genrally not use try catch. I prefer to
check the data (if condition holds true, do this) than to assume the
data is there and is valid, and watch out for exceptions. One advantage
of pre-data checks is that partial code can't fail midway, while a
try-catch must cleanup in the end.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
