Hi Mingjian, XWT relies on a model defined by IMetaclass. At the low level, XWT is mapped to SWT/JFace by default. You can change the mapping by replacing the metaclass. For instance, you have a button:
<Button text=""/> By default, it is mapped org.eclipse.swt.widget.Button. You can override it by your own Button: org.custom.Button. XML isn't humain readable than JSON. But it is good for model-to-model transformation. XAML tries to keep it as more readable as possible. The difference between JSON and XML is the extensibility. With JSON, you have a parser, which is hard to extend. With XML, it is very easy. You need just to add a new namespace. We use this concept to handle the CSS: <Composite xmlns="http://www.eclipse.org/xwt/presentation"; xmlns:x="http://www.eclipse.org/xwt"; xmlns:css="http://www.eclipse.org/css";> <Composite.layout> <GridLayout numColumns="3" /> </Composite.layout> <Label text="General" css:id="SeparatorLabel" /> </Composite> The CSS speficication is handled by a CSS engine. You can define your namspace handler. Regards yves > Hi, Yves, > > I understand your viewpoint. I hand your idea of "separation between > concept > and implementation". And your works at e4 0.9 new features are pretty > nice. > For the name of "XWT", I guess it is XML-based? However, the strong > binding > UI to XML is not very suitable. One advantage of EMF is that EMF defined > in > a higher level, and then the way persistence of EMF could be changed to > anything if someone like. > > For instance, (assumed) I like JSON or Google protocol buffers more than > XML. Did XWT provide this kind of implementation?(or say, is there a full > "separation between concept and implementation" for XWT?). If XWT can give > me this choice, I think it is acceptable as well:) > > > ps: I am not familiar with the XWT, If I am wrong, correct me:) > > best regards, > Jin > > > 2009/9/2 <[email protected]> > >> Hi Jin, >> >> A declarative UI is very important for e4 to simple UI development for >> enterprise SI presentation. It provides a separation between concept and >> implementation, and unify all UI frameworks and data frameworks >> (including >> EMF) to work together. It should be the foundation of eclipse for all UI >> Tools such as VE, MDA like PMF/EGF. So the standardization of >> declarative >> UI in e4 is absolutly necessary for the success of e4. >> >> Without this standard, it will be a masse. We are already in this >> situation in Java. There are XUL, Xform, XSWT and others, but no >> standard. >> Who dare to use it? Which tool support it? >> >> Best regards >> Yves YANG >> > EMF seem higher level technology than XML. EMF provide many advanced >> tools >> > to solve the actual world's problem. A XML file is a data aggregation. >> > But, >> > it is simple to understand. However parsing many XMLs or one big XML >> is >> > not >> > lightweight absolutely. And so I don't much like the idea of "XML >> > Everywhere". But, One question is that, is it possible to make all >> > additional technologies as the options for e4? we don't need be forced >> to >> > choose one specific technology? >> > best regards, >> > Jin Mingjian >> > _______________________________________________ >> > e4-dev mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> e4-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > e4-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev > _______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
