I wouldn't mind switching it over to a SkinablePopUpComponent. I'll set that as a goal.
My only thought on having two versions (a MobileAlert and an Alert) is that the MobileAlert would cut out some functionality in order to be a bit quicker (for example, not launching via the PopUpManager, because we really wouldn't use any of that functionality other than the ability to display the component). I also have the ability to switch skins based on the OS automatically to make it look more native, which would be harder if they were all one. -Nick On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Tink <f...@tink.ws> wrote: > I immediately noticed when looking at this is that it extends > SkinnablePopUpContainer. > > In my mind an Alert isn't a container. You do not create one and then put > contents in it, and therefore you get unnecessary overhead with the > container, and from outside the API will look like you can add elements to > it. > > I would suggest we add a SkinnablePopUpComponent, then and Alert can be > added on top of that. Then do we need a MobileAlert and Alert, or can we > not just have a different skin for the 2 versions? > > Tink > > > On 16 Mar 2012, at 04:02, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, >> >> So far I think we mostly agree that having real URLs is nice but have no >> idea what those URL should be. >> >> Are spilt if we should have a small or large number of new namespaces. >> >> The one I've currently committed is http://www.apache.org/flex (look in >> flex-config.template.xml and/or flex-config.xml) so until we come up with >> something better that what it will be. >> >> Thanks, >> Justin >> >> >
