Hi Stefan,
Stefan Volbers wrote: > > ... One thing I noticed that many of us seem to have in common is that > there > are only few HTML authors here, and many of us prefer to not use that > markup language for hypertexts in web applications. > > Beniot's words on javascript newbie devs made it clear to me - there's a > lot of people out there who are used to build apps with HTML, and to > make their life easier they soon begin to use libraries to overcome > browser limitations and easen AJAX stuff. > > That's not my world, and probably neither yours, dear reader. Using > qooxdoo cannot be compared to using any other javascript library, > because in 99% of cases using qooxdoo means complete abstraction of > HTML/CSS and adopting to a totally different OO-system ... > Thanks for your comment. After the reading of it, I have a feeling you only consider two kinds of developers for qooxdoo: * non-html developers * html developpers Personally, I think I felt into these two categories at the same time. But your remark is really interesting: it would probably useful to make some poll to discover the way people use qooxdoo generally. But I disagree a bit with you saying that qooxdoo isn't probably the best tool for "used-to-be and still" html developpers. In my opinion (but I don't know if it was the goal of the core team), the qx.bom package isn't only available for "full purist abstraction". If it was so, the core team wouldn't have included the sizzle engine, created the qx.bom.Collection class in their framework and updated the qx documentation to compare the way to work with the selector in qooxdoo and in jquery. Furthermore, if the goal was only to create "full-filled qx-widget applications only", Native, bom and inline application's versions would be needless. What I would only mention is that in mostly other javascript libraries (I wouldn't use the term "framework" for these), all is so simple at the BOM level: download and include the core build javascript file, include a contrib javascript file and use the factory class (or function) to do the job. So that's why I compared to Jquery and suggested to create BOM contribs (and even the bom build version as download too directly on the qooxdoo website)... Because people don't want to wait today. Jquery is popular because nearly every newbie use it or because opensource php/mysql cms solutions also integrate it (drupal, wordpress...). If there was some common bom contribs, more people would start to use qooxdoo. And then, after some more experience, these same person would most probably use the so powerful qooxdoo's OO and widget system at a higher level. But yep... As you said, it would most probably be better to know at witch level qooxdoo users works or would work to decide what to do. Regards, Benoît. -- View this message in context: http://qooxdoo.678.n2.nabble.com/speed-of-development-tp5168583p5182453.html Sent from the qooxdoo mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
