Kevin,

Very nicely said!


Kevin McGuire wrote:
>
> I'm not sure why we'd want to write our own SAC parser. Its a lot of
> work and there are clearly existing technologies which, while maybe
> not perfect fits, are better than starting from scratch.
>
> I'd much rather work with an existing community supporting Flute or
> Batik (assuming such communities exist, the Flute files are all 2002
> so not clear if its dead code or not). Just as with Eclipse, you see
> if the community is open to making the changes you need. If they are,
> you help make those changes. This gets you the technology you need,
> and meanwhile furthers that community. Everyone wins! And its a very
> efficient use of developer resources which are always scarse. I'd
> rather spend those cycles doing something more specific to Eclipse
> (like nice style sheets, like a UI model, etc.).
>
> Regards,
> Kevin
>
>
>
>
> *"向雅" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 08/08/2008 05:30 PM
> Please respond to
> E4 developer list <[email protected]>
>
>
>       
> To
>       "E4 developer list" <[email protected]>
> cc
>       
> Subject
>       Re: [eclipse-incubator-e4-dev] CSS namespaces
>
>
>
>       
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes, and maybe not only a parser.
>
> SWT burden lots of legacy, which I not known about, and nice to hear
> details.
>
> 2008/8/9 Kevin McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Thanks for moving the comment to this thread. I still don't
> understand what
> > you are saying though :)
> >
> > Do you mean we should implement a CSS parser from scratch rather
> than use
> > batik or flute?
> >
> > Also not sure about your comment on SWT. It has lots of legagy burden,
> > Steve will tell you!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "向雅" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > 08/08/2008 12:56 PM
> >
> > Please respond to
> > E4 developer list <[email protected]>
> > To
> > "E4 developer list" <[email protected]>
> > cc
> > Subject
> > Re: [eclipse-incubator-e4-dev] CSS namespaces
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Since the current CSS shoes not fit our feet, why not consider a
> fully new
> > CSS?
> >
> > And SWT has not any legacy burden and weight.
> >
> >
> > 2008/8/9 Kevin McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Angelo brought up CSS namespaces, I think this is an important topic
> >>> that hasn't been discussed here yet.
> >>
> >> Sigh... yes.
> >>
> >>> The question is how to specify
> >>> custom widget types in CSS. With SWT, the widget names are
> unambiguous,
> >>> but custom widgets can involve name collisions.
> >>>
> >>> Using CSS namespaces would be an option, although I would then opt for
> >>> using a default namespace for SWT to avoid clutter. The CSS could look
> >>> like this:
> >>>
> >>> @namespace "org.eclipse.swt.widgets";
> >>> @namespace my "my.name.space";
> >>>
> >>> Label {
> >>> color;red;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> my|Label {
> >>> color;red;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> On the other hand, some frequently used SWT widgets live in
> >>> "org.eclipse.swt.custom" (CLabel, CCombo, CTabFolder, ...), so those
> >>> would have to be prefixed as well (which I somehow dislike):
> >>>
> >>> swtcustom|CLabel {
> >>> color: blue;
> >>> }
> >>
> >> Agree, I dislike it too. It's annoying to clutter the typical case (SWT
> >> widgets, regardless of whether they are custom or not).
> >>
> >>> Moreover, CSS 3 is not yet widely adopted and the available parsers do
> >>> not support it out-of-the-box.
> >>
> >> Good point.
> >>
> >>> An alternative to CSS namespaces could be some kind of mapping between
> >>> widget classes and CSS element names.
> >>
> >> I think this is a reasonable approach. Extended widgets outside of SWT
> >> would
> >> need some form of qualified name, not so much to prevent clashing
> with SWT
> >> since presumably everyone avoids that, but to prevent clashing with
> each
> >> other. The element names can be whatever we want them to be, since its
> >> our
> >> code that'll do the mapping from CSS to widget method calls. So we
> could
> >> solve it without resorting to CSS name spaces, for example by requiring
> >> that
> >> extended widgets register their names with us in some qualified fashion
> >> (e.g. NebulaGallery). Kinda hacky but would work.
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 致敬
> > 向雅
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -- 
> 致敬
> 向雅
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev
>   
_______________________________________________
eclipse-incubator-e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev

Reply via email to