On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:55 PM, nullPointer <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> >> I believe is best create another from scratch,
> >> but with WPF like model and XAML
> >> as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that we cannot learn from your development.
>
>
> Because is needed change the current exposition to something like that:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-T-yF3tXCc&feature=related
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyO7v06xlWM&feature=related
>
> Forget for a moment that is from M$  XD  The wonderful of that is the
> language
> for define the UI interface, XAML, where you can describe not only basic
> propertys of "morph" like colors or positions, but too animations,
> mouseOver
> effects, timers, movies... And you can use editors of XAML, external from
> environment, for create more rich UIs.
>

I don't think WPF/XAML/whatever is good or bad (indeed I don't care :). But
I think there's lot of value in having UIBuilder with "old mechanism" *now*.
Do you think we can easily get it out of experimental / alpha state ? Or is
there design/architecture mistakes such as thinking of creating applications
with it is harmful ?

For the future, something based on Morphic 3 isn't the right way ?

Cheers,

Laurent


> The current UIBuilder is based on old mechanism for build views, and surely
> with
> a lot of errors. I believe that that is the best direction for something
> more
> new and correct.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to