World: r3wp

See Henrik, Flex has Hbox and Vbox container objects.  H meaning 
horizontal and V meaning vertical.  Where things placed in them are 
automatically aligned within.

Again, these are called "controls" in Flex.

And the IP field is built of 4 numeric fields. The CONTENT facet 
would contain that description in the style:

content: [
	numeric-field options [range: [0 255]]
	numeric-field options [range: [0 255]]
	numeric-field options [range: [0 255]]
	numeric-field options [range: [0 255]]
]

Layout and styles in the R3 GUI are two very separate issues. That's 
a very nice thing, since I can build some styles, even though the 
layout engine is currently broken.

an Hbox and Vbox equivalent would be:

stylize [
	hbox: group [
		facets: [
			columns: 0
		]
	]
	vbox: group [
		facets: [
			columns: 1
		]
	]
]

Flex is just a really ugly mix of XML, ActionScript and hardcoded 
SWF components. One thing is, that you can create forms quickly (with 
the Flex Builder IDE?) and another to create own complete application 
which does something more than submits data to java server.

any language that uses XML as its interface should not have the right 
to be called a language.

Henrik - what is this ip-field? I don't understand it a bit. Why 
should it be build based upon multiple separate styles? This seems 
overengineered to me, and not necessary. I would rather like to see 
simple field with some mask dialect. With your example - with 4 separate 
fields, how do you guarantee me, that my keyboard navigation (Arrows, 
hilighting) still works across 4 fields, as if it was just one field? 
Anything else is not acceptable ...

But see that isn't very intuitive to me Henrik.  Hbox and Vbox are 
names that give an indication of what they are going to achieve. 
 columns: 0 or 1 isn't intuitive.

We should not use containers where really not needed. I want resizable 
(or not) split window (that is the most important style - you can 
find it even here on altme), maybe general scrollable panel, but 
other than that?

Paul - what is not intuitive? Just define those two so easily as 
henrik showed in your stylesheet and since that time you only use 
their names, no? :-)

Paul, the point is that you don't see that as a casual user. You 
just use hbox and vbox.

Maxim, you don't have to use XML at all.  You can simply code everything 
in AS3 and then compile if you like.

(although we would probably just call them h-group and v-group).

Pekr: "I don't understand it a bit. Why should it be build based 
upon multiple separate styles? This seems overengineered to me, and 
not necessary"


Once you try building IP fields or any other field that is a bit 
more advanced for a basic field, you really will want this. :-)

Correct, Pekr.

Henrik - I think that actually very little number of devs here played 
or looked into new VID and its architecture. It is completly different 
by its capabilities to R2, so I think that most important task is 
going to be - define basic set of styles, so that ppl don't complain 
that Flash/Flex or some other tool do have this or that widget, and 
second - provide some nice default skin, maybe even replica of Flash 
UI, so that ppl actually will think that there is some new Flash 
related product, which does it so easily :-)

Henrik, I like Horizontal and Vertical even better.

how do you guarantee me, that my keyboard navigation (Arrows, hilighting) 
still works across 4 fields, as if it was just one field?


VID takes care of that. That's another important aspect: Keyboard 
navigation is also something you should have to mess with.

Paul, whatever name you want. :-)

Yes. but that needs to be the mindset going into that.  There needs 
to be goals - not just development.

oops... keyboard navigation is also something you _shouldn't_ have 
to mess with.

If REBOL can't offer something NEW or something faster then it loses.

Henrik - as for fields, I still think that some kind of 'mask dialect 
would be better aproach, but we will see :-) I used it with Visual 
Objects (Clipper), where you have something like reg-exp, which defined 
allowed chars, skipped chars (dots in IP field, or parens for phone 
fields), etc.

Paul, the thing is: It takes about 3-4 minutes to implement those 
hbox/vbox styles. It's not a showstopper that the styles you may 
be looking for aren't there.

I think you should change a room.. it's far to be a Tech News discussion:)

Paul - you should reverse it. We do develop in REBOL. If Flash/Flex 
can't offer something new or faster, then it looses. Now it is upon 
you to show me, that you do your app faster in Flash/Flex than in 
R3, once architecture is finished.

Henrik - exactly. I would be very curious, what would general developer 
of Flash/Flex do, if he would like to code new widget/control himself 
(define new class). So - Paul - do you know only how to use new or 
derived widgets, or do you also know, how to easily (or not so easily) 
extend Flash/Flex widgetset?

I created a FLEX group to move discussion to.

henrik, I agree with paul that   (Me... agreeing with paul, wtf !?!?? 
;-)   


  row [  ]  and  column  [  ]  styles  MUST be part of the default 
  style sheet, other wise every application will be using them but 
  with different names....


 its like if you said, the button style is there but it doesn't have 
 a name.

it has a name

each style is named, always was ... row vs columns - not sure ...

Maxim, I can add them and see how much sense they make. Takes a couple 
of minutes.

what I'm saying is that if difference between toggle button and button 
is just an attribute change,  the 'toggle style should still be in 
the stylesheet... other skins/stylesheets might use a completely 
different internal, but since toggle has been defined globaly, people 
will be using the name toggle in their apps.

for me VID offers just about the same featureset/mindsel as GLayout 
already gives me, and coding GLayout without using row/column  (whatever 
you decide to call it h-group v-group) doesn't make sense.

(VID 3)

(this is a fun discussion. it takes much longer to discuss than it 
takes to fix. :-))

scanning code with row/column it quite explicit, you immediately 
*see* the layout.  using grid with an attribute, doesn't give you 
that instant verbosity.

:-)

I agree.

But we use grid, no?

wow an american, a canadian and a european ... all agreeing.... damn, 
I think we've reached a MILESTONE  in R3    ;-D

Pekr, well, it's called GROUP and all that changes it is the number 
of columns you want and the number of faces in it.

pekr yes build using group by default, but I might create an alternative 
object for that stylename, and your layout still works using it..

and I don't have to supply ALL grid-like functionality.

Henrik - the bad thing (IMO) is, that group and panel use different 
coordinate systems - group places elements by default horizontally, 
panel vertically. Carl told me it is on purpose, but I am curious 
how users will remember which is which.

Maxim - we need Canadian, American, European and French to agree, 
to make it perfect :-)

Pekr, it really is only about changing _one digit_ in the code.

That is a design flaw.  A programmer should not have to go back and 
look up what a 0 or a 1 refer to when if there were user-friendly 
terms then it could make sense on initial observation.

Henrik - yes, we both thought it might be a bug, but I asked Carl 
and he wants it that way - so I expect no single bit change :-)