Yes on all questions.

James Wennmacher - Unicon
480.558.2420

On 11/03/2014 02:19 PM, Andrew Petro wrote:
> James,
>
> I totally agree that single responsive UIs in portlets rather than 
> forked UIs depending upon whether we think the device is mobile 
> flavored is the way to go.  And that Respondr enables those responsive 
> UIs through exposing Bootstrap, etc.
>
> And that rendering one-portlet-at-a-time so greatly improves this 
> since it makes ootb Bootstrap techniques just work (portlet width is 
> viewport width) and it improves the feasibility of responsive UIs vs 
> tailored UIs — such a portlet UI might well feed down to the client 
> more content than it chooses to display client-side, but if it’s just 
> one portlet doing this at a time, the result may still be fast enough 
> and low bandwidth enough to be acceptable.
>
> All that said, the Respondr technology is compatible with the heroic 
> view switching in portlets depending on mobile-ness of the client, 
> isn't it? To the extent that adopters want to be doing those heroics 
> in their portlets, or need to continue to do so as a transition 
> strategy until improving single UIs to be responsive, they should be 
> able to keep doing them under Respondr, right?
>
> Which should help provide a pretty gentle and compelling upgrade path 
> for adopters to flow forward off mUniversality and into Respondr?
>
> Andrew
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:32 AM, James Wennmacher 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Andrew as always I appreciate the thoughtful feedback.  See below.
>
>     James Wennmacher - Unicon
>     480.558.2420  <tel:480.558.2420>
>
>     On 11/03/2014 07:58 AM, Andrew Petro wrote:
>>     James,
>>
>>     Like I mentioned previously, this sounds like progress and I'm in
>>     favor of it.
>>
>>     Now digging into some of the details:
>>
>>     JW> Of course the mUniversality view attempted to resolve this
>>     issue differently, but one thing I think we don't want is
>>     multiple themes to address the mobile experience.
>>
>>     As I understand it, the way mUniversality addressed this
>>     differently was to on initial render display the expanded menu of
>>     content in the layout, ready for user navigation.  Whereas
>>     Respondr looks to collapse that navigation into a hamburger and
>>     take a best guess at what content to show the user on initial render.
>>
>>     Is it too much to hope that these are close enough that Repondr
>>     becomes a natural upgrade path for current mUniversality adopters
>>     under this change?
>     JNW> I hope it is not too much to hope for :-).  The other aspect
>     of Respondr mobile view is to not have mobile-specific views in
>     the portlets to reduce maintenance. I believe if we make the
>     Respondr mobile view reasonably performant, it will naturally
>     supercede mUniversality as generally superior.  I suspect it will
>     never be as performant (larger libraries, more CSS than the
>     slimmer mUniversality views), but if we can reduce the overall
>     performance difference (and improve the UI) I believe we can hit a
>     threshold where it is acceptable to the community as the mobile
>     web solution.
>>
>>     I suspect that the show-the-upper-left-most-portlet algorithm is
>>     going to end up being too arbitrary, but no need to address that
>>     now -- can discover what options adopters need in place of that
>>     when the upper-left approach proves too limiting. Current
>>     mUniversality adopters really wanting the
>>     show-the-navigation-menu-expanded-on-initial-render behavior,
>>     however, could tweak this algorithm to render a responsive
>>     sitemap portlet by fname, say, and viola! they have an
>>     mUniversality experience implemented on Respondr.
>>
>>     And then we get to retire some themes for uPortal 5 or so, right? :)
>     JNW> Agreed, and I hope we can retire Universality/mUniversality. 
>     Interest and traction on Respondr so far seems good.  My concern
>     at this point is the mobile experience to help keep that interest
>     and traction going.
>>
>>     Andrew
>>
>>
>
>     -- 
>
>     You are currently subscribed [email protected]  
> <mailto:[email protected]>  as:[email protected]  
> <mailto:[email protected]>
>     To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, 
> seehttp://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
>
>
> -- 
>
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev


-- 
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev

Reply via email to