On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Blake Johnson <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> On Apr 6, 4:43 pm, Chris Meller <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I haven't looked at your branch in depth, but I still love the idea of
> > splitting out each page into its own class.
> >
> > I'm somewhat less attached to the HTTP -> CRUD idea. It would definitely
> > depend upon how the implementation panned out in regards to browser
> support.
> >
>
> Like Chris, I am very much in favor of splitting the adminhandler
> class into subsections.
>
> I am a little more confused about your HTTP->CRUD proposal. What
> exactly does your HTTP to CRUD mapping buy us?
>
> The admin JS is also a bit of a mess. I understand the desire for an
> itemManage API, but even before that I'd like to see a little general
> clean-up. For instance, we should be using descriptive CSS class-hooks
> to generate behavior rather than lists of CSS IDs (eg. add a
> "draggable" class to relevant HTML entities rather than list the IDs
> of every entity we want to be draggable).


Agreed.


> Also, we use the jQuery
> library, but otherwise we use a very non-jQuery-like JS style.


Some of the things we do could probably be wrapped up into jQuery plugins
(so they extend $()) and can just be dropped on pages to do what they're
supposed to do (by parsing out anything with a certain CSS class, for
example), but a lot of it probably shouldn't. There's some good OOP
JavaScript in there, it just needs to be modularized a lot like
adminhandler...

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to