World: r3wp

http://94.145.78.91/files/r3/gui/252.png


SCRUM tool prototype GUI example. We are exploring how to organize 
the GUI, as the R3 GUI can be used to prototype things now. The next 
step here is to get it integrated with the database reactors prototype 
written earlier. If that is done correctly, we should be able to 
switch from a prototype file database to a different database backend 
(SQL based) without touching any GUI code.

Good luch ... I am really curious if your reactors are flexible to 
cover all DB needs.

What's the red color? Widget in focus? :-)

yes, for now that was easier.

We should start talking look & feel at some point too, as it really 
looks completly strange :-) Cheap gradients with Aqua like old Mac 
look mixed with 70ties Unix grey aproach :-). How can anyone create 
anything like that nowadays? This is really strange, as I remember 
Gabriele's effect-lab, Cyphre's styles pack, and also Henrik's first 
UI attempts, and those looked much better ...


I need to know, if it will be adressed, as I am scared to touch the 
gui, as I fear it will do really something bad to me :-)

the skin will not be changed until nearly all basic functionality 
is complete. it's my task, but am not available for it anyway.

this is also to avoid risking having to redo the skin several times, 
if style architecture changes.

btw what happened to the old R3 V2 gui from carl? could this be used 
as a starting point fpr another GUI?

the style was not bad imho. any architectual reason why this wasn't 
developed further?

Tom, Carl's GUI was inadequate in many ways. The one we are building 
now is directly based on it, but replaces parts of it, like the resizing 
scheme.

Pekr, what you think is ugly and cheap design, is actualy THE FUTURE 
of UI design. Every GUI will look like this in 2-3 years, I wonder 
you don't see it. At least you understand this is the definite and 
final design of R3GUI.

TomBon - I think, and I hope, that not much changed in underlying 
architecture design. But you probably refer to Carl's Spring skin 
:-) First time I saw it, I found it strange, now I miss it :-)

But seriously, as Henrik said, functionality will be done first, 
then the look.

Rebolek - my dog randomly drawing would come up with better aesthetics 
probably :-) One should have pleasure to play with the stuff in the 
process, while I have really a hard time looking at any single screenshot 
of new GUI. What I don't understand is, why it changed from the former 
look, if draw code for such style was already available?

Well, at least I have something to play with. If I will somehow proceed 
with adapting demo, I might try to experiment to change some style's 
look, to see how the design and functionality are separated.

Pekr, that's great! So let you dog do the draw blocks for some styles 
and we will add them!

Rebolek - that is an idea, with my dog :-)

I have no problem with replacing current look, if anyone provides 
something. But I'm not going to work on look now, because the priority 
of this task is currently low.

I might try to "port" Carl's Spring look, to just see, how it works 
or not. It could show some potential problem with eventual skining 
...

Pekr, if you need any help with porting, I'll be glad to help. Just 
start with something easy as button, and let me know if you have 
any questions.

henrik, thx for clarifying. Pekr, yes, same here ;-)

I will not participate to any bug tracker, bug correction, or testings 
regarding R3/GUI until we don't have a full detailled schematic of 
R3-host-kit, while we don't know where we are going with this project, 
and while we don't know if a better path can be found to avoid this 
project to fall in porting maze.

Even Pekr's dog knows, that a better path can always be found!

And I bet his dogs learns faster, that we stated more than once that 
we currently don't spend any time on eye-candy. Maybe Petr learns 
it too ;-)

db-reactors: They will work for (my guess) 99% of all cases.

I have to support Petr's dog here. I fully understand why looks are 
not a priority for development, but I also know that if we proudly 
present the GUI functionality to the world with the current skin, 
almost everyone who sees that will confirm in his mind that REBOL 
is a thing of the past and will never touch it again

Shadwolf, if you want a REBOL GUI that can just be recompiled on 
all platforms based on OpenGL or QT or GTK, the current host kit 
fully supports that. You can just build such an interface on it

But I think the problem is that you want "the community" to do that 
work for you and profit from their work without doing anything yourself...

I apreciate the work put onto R3GUI. I am just a spectator, I am 
not involved into the development. So I whish to say thank you to 
all the people building R3GUI.

From time to time the community get nervous about lack of development 
or inadequate results. Please note that they are building the foundations 
for further work. One time in the future the GUI will have the look 
similar to MacOS or GUI found on mobile device. Until then an old 
fashioned GUI is better than nothing.

Please consider all the hard work put from unpaid people on this 
project.

I like that the UI look isn't inherent in the GUI. Skinning was a 
value from the beginning.

I have only a couple of request: please consider now the modification 
to the event system to support multitouch devices and whatever is 
needed for smooth GUI animation. It is important for further porting 
on other platform.


Also, keep in mind that good documentation is essential to let people 
use your work.

A last note for ROBERT: I have read that r3GUI stiles will be developed 
until they are functional to the project specification the where 
created for. 

A clear, written, specific, development path to further develop these 
style and the missing other would be good to have a clear global 
view about the final goal apart this project specific development.

(sorry for all the wrong plurals... :-)

There doesn't need to be a specified development path from RMA for 
styles that are being developed outside of RMA. Independent cooperating 
projects are fine. We don't have to bog down the development process 
with too much management overhead.

Please Brian, what  RMA stand for ?

It's the initials for Robert's company.

Brian. Your opinion is ok for me. Lets wait how this develpment ends. 
Then we could work on what has been done to improve it.

How do I easily turn docs into html, readable along with images?

tricky

Googledocs can turn a doc into html ...

there are lots of different paths ... doc -> pdf -> html is one

I think Pekr speaks of the docs included in the RMA's gui zip. The 
format is apparently done to be converted by makedoc2.r

oh .. haven't looked at this.

:-) yes, jocko is right ... will have to look-up some old MDP scripts 
...

It's possible that these are done with Carl's WIP document generator. 
I'm not sure if that works with MDP.

could it be included in the distro, or even maybe better, to provide 
html version directly?

we want to ask Carl to free the WIP script.

if not, we'll have to modify MDP to be compatible.

well, you could run it via some automat script which makes your builds, 
to get us html, no?

it doesn't help, when we don't have the WIP script to parse the text.