Hey,

I'd like to get in on this, too. But I haven't a lot of time to dedicate to 
much extra-cirriculuar activities at the moment. What kind of timeline were you 
looking at?

Johnny

On 2013-09-18, at 9:54 AM, Colin Clark <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jon,
> 
> Thanks! That's awesome. It'll be a fun project.
> 
> Colin
> 
> ---
> Colin Clark
> http://fluidproject.org
> 
> On 2013-09-18, at 9:11 AM, Jonathan Hung <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Colin,
>> 
>> Thanks so much for bringing this back to the top. Glad to hear that FSS is 
>> going to get some attention going forward.
>> 
>> I'd be willing to initiate / facilitate the research into 3rd party tools if 
>> no one else steps forward. I imagine others will have input on this as well.
>> 
>> - Jon.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Colin Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> There hasn't been any activity on this thread in two months, so I guess we 
>> don't have a huge wave of creative ideas for the future direction of FSS.
>> 
>> We're planning to significantly refresh and simplify Infusion for version 
>> 2.0, which we will likely release within a year. Now seems like the time to 
>> start deprecating aspects of Infusion that we aren't planning to bring 
>> forward with us.
>> 
>> Here's my proposal:
>> 
>> 1. Deprecate the FSS in Infusion 1.5. We'll continue to support it fully 
>> until we have a viable replacement.
>> 2. Start a research effort to look at third-party CSS tools, selecting one 
>> that we will use in UI Options as well as for our demos
>> 3. Ship this new third-party tool and any additional supports needed by 
>> Infusion users in version 2.0
>> 
>> Thoughts and comments? Is there anyone who is willing take a lead on #2?
>> 
>> Colin
>> 
>> ---
>> Colin Clark
>> http://fluidproject.org
>> 
>> On 2013-07-03, at 3:08 PM, Colin Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Jon and everyone,
>>> 
>>> On 2013-07-03, at 10:24 AM, Jonathan Hung <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Recently Justin, Heidi, and I have been talking about FSS and we were 
>>>> wondering if we should continue maintaining FSS or transition to a new 
>>>> strategy.
>>> 
>>> Have you considered what the alternative strategies might look like? If so, 
>>> could you describe them for us?
>>> 
>>>> Specifically, it seems that browser standards compliance, third party CSS 
>>>> frameworks (like Twitter's Bootstrap), and CSS languages (like Sass/SCSS, 
>>>> or Less) have advanced sufficiently that it could replace FSS. However, if 
>>>> we make a change to using a CSS framework, this will affect other Infusion 
>>>> components like UI Options.
>>> 
>>> Can you elaborate on how these different technologies might serve as a 
>>> replacement for FSS? What roles would they play, specifically? We've got 
>>> some very diverse tools listed here--Sass is quite different from, say, 
>>> Bootstrap, and works at a lower infrastructural level. Can you guys 
>>> describe how you imagine we might use these technologies?
>>> 
>>> Johnny Taylor seems incredibly enthusiastic about Sass, which is a good 
>>> sign.
>>> 
>>>> Conversely, maintaining FSS is complex due to:
>>>> - the different theme implementations (FSS comes with 10 themes)
>>> 
>>> My impression is that most of the "demo" themes--rust, mist, etc.--are long 
>>> overdue for being deprecated and removed. The themes used by UI Options, 
>>> however, are foundational for doing transformation of web applications. Are 
>>> you thinking that we'd replace these with something else, somehow?
>>> 
>>>> - the FSS CSS itself is like the API (modifications must be done with 
>>>> consideration to the effect on end users)
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure I understand what this means. Can you explain?
>>> 
>>>> - lack of resources to maintain and improve it (some styling methods used 
>>>> in FSS seem a bit antiquated like using .PNG images to create different 
>>>> button borders for themes).
>>> 
>>> Yes, I agree. I've tried to encourage efforts to address these legacy 
>>> weaknesses in FSS, but so far no one has been willing to take on the job. 
>>> Given that, I'm not averse to simply choosing an existing framework 
>>> (Bootstrap, Foundation, or one of the many, many others out there) and 
>>> offering it up both for our own development and for our users.
>>> 
>>>> Do we:
>>>> 1. maintain status quo (no changes)
>>> 
>>> I don't think this is a good idea to maintain the status quo for FSS, but 
>>> we do need someone who wants to take on and lead a renewal effort.
>>> 
>>>> 2. explore re-implementing FSS using another framework like Bootstrap (and 
>>>> keep FSS classnames the same)
>>> 
>>> I think we will have to consider how to preserve backwards compatibility, 
>>> especially for UI Options users who have sprinkled FSS class names 
>>> throughout their apps. We could certainly consider streamlining the class 
>>> naming conventions we use (they're pretty long), but I think we do also 
>>> want to support the use case where people are mixing up framework classes 
>>> with their own. Most CSS frameworks that I've encountered tend to use 
>>> unprefixed names that will cause conflicts with many existing stylesheets, 
>>> which is a shame.
>>> 
>>>> 3. deprecate FSS
>>> 
>>> Presumably we still need something to power UI Options, so I'm not sure if 
>>> this a viable option. Or am I missing something?
>>> 
>>> I hope this helps,
>>> 
>>> Colin
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Colin Clark
>>> http://fluidproject.org
>> 
>> _______________________________________________________
>> fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
>> see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> JONATHAN HUNG
>> 
>> INCLUSIVE DESIGNER, IDRC
>> 
>> T: 416 977 6000 x3951
>> F: 416 977 9844
>> E: [email protected]
>> 
>> OCAD UNIVERSITY
>> Inclusive Design Research Centre
>> 205 Richmond Street W, Toronto, ON, M5V 1V3
>> 
>> www.ocadu.ca
>> www.idrc.ocad.ca
> 
> _______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

Reply via email to