well dorkie dork, my thoughts can best be expressed in the made for tv movie, "portrait of a teenage component set". jk
I love the new approach and am excited to see it come to fruition. This would mean possibly smaller component size, exponentially more customizable skinning and styling and behavior. Design programs like Thermo could write out the skin, etc. But the thing I like about the current component set is the ton of properties and methods they thought of using the constructive approach. I don't have to reinvent the wheel with the api they include. What I want to know is how do you plan to reconcile the current component features set with this new approach? So we may get stripped down components that are highly customizable components but what about the features that aren't deemed core to the component? Will we have to add those in? I suppose you could include templates, like an "Accordion" template, "Vertical List" template, "horizontal list" template, etc that includes the current feature set. Or you could abstracted functionality in a way that we could easily plug it back. I'm talking about adding in features like accessibility, focus management, toggle button, etc on a need to include basis. On Nov 12, 2007 1:46 AM, dorkie dork from dorktown < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I ran across these videos tonight and all I can say is I'm excited. This > looks to be really amazing stuff. Great work guys! > > If you develop Flex components you should take a look at these videos, > > http://www.onflexwithcf.org/index.cfm/2007/10/19/Flex-Roadmap-presented-by-Ely-Greenfield--Videos > > the main thing that captured my attention was the way the skin and (some > or all? of the behavior) was broken out of the component. thoughts? >
