Andrea Aime wrote: > Another thing that I was thinking about is the point that Arne raised during > yesterday's meeting about the current UI looking bad and being clearly > designed by a Java programmer as opposed by an interaction designer. > I found that Wicket was the "last man standing" in the tradeoff between user interface designer and Java developer; it was about minimal as a framework could get while still leaving a web page around for traditional web page design to hack away at. The GWT approach that uses layouts, combined with CSS definitions on the web side was a little far out for me (putting everything in the hands of Java developers again).
Nothing prevents the user interface design from designing a specification for the Java developers to follow; Wicket just left this specific door open (an html page to edit). > An UI that does both REST and web pages has to behave like a service > framework anyways, so I guess this leaves no room all for an interaction > designed to impose a different UI workflow? This seems to me like something > requiring the REST API to be separated from the UI? > What do people think about having the a REST api at the same level as the configuration user interface; ie something that is optional and not required for GeoServer to run? For me they are slightly different flavours of the same idea... Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
