> Also we can use this as an opportunity to provide a compatibility > layer across different vendors and/or different widget systems.
I suppose, technically yes. That is more complex than what I really had in mind...but if gets me widget interfaces, I suppose I'm interested. In general I'm skeptical about "vendor agnostic" widget APIs, because given how nit-picky perfect UIs have to be, it doesn't seem realistic to be able to switch implementations and still have things look right (other than some trivial theming). > In upcoming weeks, we will start talking more about improving > UI+widget development in GWT. It is good to wait until that gets more > concrete before introducing/changing any APIs. No problem. Sounds interesting! Also, I'm really glad to hear you'll be keeping us non-Googlers in the loop. Perhaps it is naive, but with the re-open sourcing of GWT, I'd love to see more of Google's internal conversations about GWT happen in a public forum, like gwt-contrib. Totally understood that you can't discuss internal business details on a public forum, but it seems like a lot of open source projects have technical, cross-company discussions on their open mailing lists. - Stephen -- -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
