2015-02-19 23:24 GMT+01:00 Johan Fabry <[email protected]>: > > The problem is that people are confused by the term Model, so they will > also be confused by Logic. I want to remove the confusion and make clear > that it is a user interface (and that it is composable by default) -> > ComposableUI. > > It could also be ComposableUserInterface but we do not win anything by > that name, as UI is a standard acronym + we would have to type more when > subclassing it. So I prefer ComposableUI. >
But this *is* a model, not a UI. Yes a model for the UI, but still, the real UI-View is what comes through the Spec interpreter. "UI" sounds like "the whole user interface", but Specs ComposableModels are meant as "building blocks". UI-Model -> WidgetAdapter -> Widget/View. I would prefer (in this order): 1. ComposableModel (because this is the current name) 2. ComposableWidgetModel (widget: a brick or part of an UI) 3. ComposableUIModel 4. ComposableUI I am not fully against 4., because it is the goal of spec to build reuseable UIs. For example for a Spec based "ListSelectionDialog" we can reuse the whole component, not only the model, not only the view, but the whole component with interaction between the list and other controls. But I would prefer ComposableWidgetModel, because a "Widget" (button/textfield/list) is the smallest unit of a user interface representable with Spec. nicolai > > > On Feb 19, 2015, at 14:37, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I know :) > > So may be Logic because this is the logic of the application. > > > > Stef > > Le 19/2/15 18:16, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit : > >> Well, it means User Interface ;-) > >> > >> The thing that got everybody confused is precisely the word Model, if > we keep that the confusion will continue. > >> > >>> On 19 Feb 2015, at 18:11, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Johan > >>> > >>> For me UI does not mean anything. > >>> So may be ComposableUIModel? > >>> Or ComposableUILogic > >>> > >>> > >>> Stef > >>> > >>> Le 19/2/15 13:22, Johan Fabry a écrit : > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> I don’t read mails on pharo-dev usually, so sorry if this has been > discussed before (and then pointers to the discussion would be appreciated). > >>>> > >>>> Last week, in Pharo-users I proposed the Spec terminology changes > below. Responses were positive. I am willing to volunteer to do that next > week so it’s finished before the 28th and it’s included in Pharo 4. And > then I will update the documentation as well. But first I want to know if > there are any objections from people on this list. > >>>> > >>>> I propose to rename: > >>>> - ComposableModel to ComposableUI > >>>> - all the protocols ‘protocol-*’ to ‘API-*’ > >>>> > >>>> Other renaming-related comments are also welcome. > >>>> > >>>> ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- > >>>> > >>>> Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry > >>>> PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of > Chile > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- > > Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry > PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile > > >
