Sorry for troubling everyone...
Jim
On 7/28/06, Andreas Ecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Hi, Jim,
sorry to hear about your current frustration. :-( Hope you get over it
soon.
While I think it is perfectly ok and quite common to reach low points in
using any sufficiently complex software project, I do not think your
assumptions and expectations are appropriate.
Jim Hunter wrote:
> I am having a hard time subscribing to the thought process that is being
> used to create new controls for qooxdoo. As a 'consumer' of the toolkit, I
> should not need to know how each control is put together to use it. The
> header of the table is a great example. As a consumer/user of the table, if
> I want to make the header font Bold, Arial, 18pt, I should not need to know
> that there are different controllers for the header then there are for the
> body or footer. As a consumer, I should only have to get a handle to the
> header via some call like getHeader() then set the font attributes or style
> attributes or whatever. Internally, it is perfectly fine that these pieces
> are controlled by different mechanisms/rendereres etc. That is just fine,
> but access to those pieces should be surfaced to the consumer at the table
> level. Give me an example of any other mainstream language where you
> need to
> know everything about the way a control was created in order to use it.
> If I
> drop a table on my Delphi form, and I want to set the font color, I don't
> need to dig three levels deep to find the small piece of the code that
> controls the font in order to make a change, I simply use
> table.font.color:= clBlue. This is common in all languages. If I was
> someone that wanted to
> create a new control and had many sub components to handle different
> aspects
> of the control, I would get it all working then create helper functions at
> the top level to allow for easy access to the underlying properties.
>
> I guess what I am missing here is why everyone thinks it's better to over
> complicate things instead of making this an easy toolkit to use? The bottom
> line is that users of the toolkit should never need to know as much about
> the toolkit as the people that created it just to do simple things.
You mention the word "customer" quite often, also "any other mainstream
language" and especially "Delphi". Well, qooxdoo is not to compete
against a commercial rapid application development environment like
"Borland Delphi", which has been perfected over 20 years by a major
software company.
qooxdoo is an ambitious LGPL-licensed Open Source project, that aims at
taking _javascript_ web development to the next level. It is work in
progress involving many developers and users. If anyone thinks something
needs fixing or improvement, he/she can just do so. It is Open Source,
right? Who says that we cannot make any existing stuff better, faster,
easier to use?
I'd like you to continue to contribute by either rethinking or recoding
existing features (e.g.
http://bugzilla.qooxdoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116 ) or by even developing
any new features. Your knowlegde and experience of Delphi will
certainly be a source of inspiration.
Cheers,
Andreas
PS: Someone once said: "As a decade old delphi lover, i would say
qooxdoo is like VCL for _javascript_. :)".
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
