World: r3wp

Carl seems to have some specific stuff in mind for vid direction 
but he is just not going to get to it anytime soon...I do not see 
a prob with you guys coming up with an alternate vid (rebgui for 
r3) in the mean time...each gui may be addressing different needs 
anyway. Carl's VID, when ready, can become the defacto and distributed 
with R3 but in the mean time we can use the alternate to push R use 
forward.

right now... what we are waiting to get R3 VID going as an open, 
steady, team effort, really is the next host release with VID implemented 
as an extension.

IMHO, Henrik has stepped up as project manager for R3VID.  Cyphre 
is still interested in helping out on the low-level AGG AFAIK.   
Others, like me, will definitely chime-in when it starts being more 
organized, if only to implement Styles, themes and stuff like that.


But we need the next host released... and AFAICT, that is one of 
the main projects of Carl right now.  At least, I hope it is.

I might also work on some low-level stuff, which is what I'm more 
interested in helping on right now.

even for the OpenGL implementation, the next host will make my job 
easier AFAIK.

Tags are now implemented. Now it's a matter of using them.

Henrik - what is the plan to get Carl's opinion on some of his known 
plans, e.g. layers. Shouldn't you know, how were those supposed to 
work, etc., before you do any other design decisions?

It would be preferable, yes. It depends how we can push it around, 
as I'm not sure Carl will want to go into GUI work now.

well, such claims sound very strange. One of the reasons why Carl 
forked GUI was, that he did not agree to some concepts. So it really 
surprises me, that you plan to continue to work on VID, without any 
coordination ... that once again asks for later fork. I think that 
for Carl to explain/document his ideas would not mean more than few 
hours of his work ...

if you do only preparation/documentation work right now, everything 
is ok then ...

The way we implement things is so they can rather quickly be pulled 
out again, if we have to and revert to the original VID3.4, and the 
implementations will be documented clearly.

Since there is a business decision on the line, we can't afford to 
wait with implementation, even if Carl doesn't like it, but we still 
want to stay friends with him. :-)

so we really are talking fork here :-) Well, I will be glad for any 
GUI for R3, that is a fact. It is just that I thought managing Carl 
for some 1-2 hours chat on some isolated group here would not hurt, 
and you would simply know, what Carl's plan is. I can understand 
business driven decisions ... but anyway ...

I prefer to have our changes gradually being applied to the official 
VID3.4, rather than just declare it a fork immediately. But we'll 
see.

Any working GUI is preferable to an official broken one.

Even if an official GUI is released tomorrow it will not be all things 
to all people and some will develop other gui's (rebgui, maxim's 
glass etc) why not start now as opposed to later. It need not be 
considered a folk of the offical vid...just an alternative choice. 
the official when released will be adopted if it works well enough 
so you won't be stepping on carl's toes.

folk>fork

Guys, remember that Carl WANTS help?  that means accepting ideas. 
 especially from like-minded people.

AFAIK, Henrik is closest to the source as to how Carl wants VID to 
evolve.  So if you (Henrik) want to put time and effort while the 
next host gets released, I say GO!  


Its time this community stops asking "what does Carl want" all the 
time.  He wants REBOL to be used.  he wants his last 15 years of 
life to mean something to more than himself.


Everything going into R3 is a direct response to what WE have been 
asking for the last decade.  He wants R3 to be what WE need, within 
a few guidelines we all agree to in the first place.


He wants REBOL to grow, and like a child that has grown... Some parts 
of REBOL will grow without him, others will grow with his counsel.

We aren't followers of a sect, waiting for praise from the prophet.


The more we take up projects and move them forwards without his daily 
intervention, the more the overall will be coordinated... 
right now, Carl is still too close to the code IMHO.  


which is why we don't have feedback on some of the projects we start 
work on (like schemes, for example).

The fact that brian has completely taken over parts of the development 
of R3, should be a clue, that there are other areas where this is 
possible.


This is all just my two cents, but in the last year that I have been 
chatting with Carl and some of the people which have "taken responsibility" 
for some stuff in R3, the more Its obvious to me that Carl just wants 
the community to do more... to take up more responsibility.

You got it right.

BTW, the GUI project will be coming back to life soon... and I'll 
only be one of several people working on it.

' :-/   
<sheesh> didn't know you where on line hehehe.

I'm really glad you're posting it. You need a blog.

I really like this line: "he wants his last 15 years of life to mean 
something to more than himself"

I think of that every day.

:-)

you should look at the REBOL3 /library group... quickly... give a 
bit of feedback on a proposed API I will start work on shortly.

Begun detailing the implementations here:

http://rebol.net/wiki/R3_GUI_Implementation

why is it that we can't use reflection functions on GOBs?

Carl why 15  and not 30 ?

Henrik, Some thoughts about the default STATES in faces.



DISABLED --> (the face is removed from its container or not constructed)

INACTIVE  --> (not reacting  to any events or actor, but still here 
and showed)

READONLY --> (reacting to some events (TAB, CTRL+C ...) but not modifiable)

HIDDEN --> (not showed but still in its container and can react (keep 
its place (spaced) on the screen))

hmm, yes, those are possible

notice that we should be able to combinate some of them together.
INACTIVE+READONLY
INACTIVE+HIDDEN

forget INACTIVE+READONLY

READONLY could be for information faces, which aren't INACTIVE.

can you give an example of HIDDEN?

yes or for labels

HIDDEN could be used in some view where some data must not be showed 
(dynamicly) to some users.

depending of user's rights

Would it be wise to have hidden faces that way? it would be easy 
to find the face information anyway through the console.


There is another area, where it might be useful, but not sure: Tab 
panels, which hide entire panels of faces.

Agree but all users are not developers, (they will not peek in the 
console  ;-)

BY combining INACTIVE + HIDDEN you can have several  views of the 
same Panel.
Detailed ones and a shortest ones.

well, I think we want realistic use-cases for each tag. HIDDEN might 
be useful in the context of "don't render this as it's hidden, it's 
a waste of time"

yes, it might be useful there, but it seems that INACTIVE would be 
enough along with the original DISABLED. INACTIVE is what I call 
FROZEN.

In my version, DISABLED remove completly the face so that it's not 
constructed or  activable anymore

yes actually your FROZEN is the same as INACTIVE

Another usage for the HIDDEN state.

To add a validation process not associated with something to show.

For example, a component to check the rights of the user at the validation 
of a pannel.

Though, something like handling the rights should be server sided

My original DISABLED allows the face to still be rendered in a disabled 
fashion, which is good for forms. I'm not sure how useful it is to 
have your DISABLED after initial rendering, because you would actively 
have to remove the face.... although that presents some interesting 
possibilities for altering the face topology. There are already styles 
in R3 that don't render and that's handled differently.


The idea for FROZEN was that it would be a first step toward using 
the same styles with altered behavior for a GUI editor. FROZEN was 
selected, because of the simple FREEZE-FACE/THAW-FACE names.


READONLY seems the same as SELECT, but READONLY is probably a better 
name.


HIDDEN seems like a cop-out to me. :-) If you want a security measure, 
elements that a user should not see should not be included at all.


With my DISABLED, FROZEN/INACTIVE and READONLY, would that cover 
it?

Let me think... I have to find a better usage for the HIDDEN state 
:)

keep at it :-)