VID, %, dialects WAS: percent! - new datatype request
[1/6] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 13-Jun-2002 13:02
The VID vein, and what should be added to make it a better dialect for GUI
layouts, is something I've spent a little time thinking about, and I have an
opinion. (saw that coming, didn't ya? :)
VID is good, really good I think. Could it be better? Undoubtedly. Remember,
though, that VID+Layout is just *one example* of a GUI dialect. I keep
seeing requests from people for RT to add this or that to REBOL/VID/IOS but
I think the real future lies with us. Yes, RT may want or need to add
certain key functionality but they have already given us a foundation on
which we can build pretty much anything we want. Yes, a standard is a
terrific thing to have around, and they need to be aware of its importance,
but I think we're going to see many "specialized" standards emerge over
time.
VID is a good, general, GUI dialect for doing screen layouts. As Joel
mentioned, resizable screens aren't easy to get right. Resizing individual
components isn't so hard, but maintaining a well balanced layout *is*. Just
look at how most apps handle it.
Rather than saying VID is lacking because it can't handle proportional
sizing, we can write our own flex-view and flex-layout functions based on
lessons learned writing ad-hoc resize routines. Maybe it's even a
combination. Maybe defining a flex-face style gets us most of the way there.
Is there a single heuristic we can apply to all visual layouts? Of course
not! It all depends on what, and with whom, you're trying to communicate. We
should see dialects for all kinds of specific purposes, and templates to go
with them. Some will be industry specific, some output/device related, and
some process oriented.
One of the problems I *do* see is that the stuff RT provides is more than
good enough
, so not many people in this small community are driven to
replace them, or even enhance them in a major way. Another problem is the
lack of documentation that would help us to tackle those tasks with
confidence. If things were reversed (i.e. really good docs and limited
feature implementations), what do you think would happen? Would we complain
about the poor examples and write REBOL off, or would we see the potential
and rise to the challenge?
In the early days of VB, writing VBXs with the CDK was pretty painful, so
not many people did it. The concept behind them was so powerful, though,
that it survived. Now, I'd bet not many people write VB apps using only the
11 standard controls.
The potential is there.
--Gregg
[2/6] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 14-Jun-2002 10:07
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]On Behalf Of
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
> but I think we're going to see many "specialized" standards emerge over
> time.
Hi Gregg, that's the power and the danger of dialects. Fragmenting the available
dialects by forking to many can be a very dangerous thing to productivity and
community developing. Which road should I take if there were 5 VID dialects out
there? Will these be compatible? Most likely not. Can I combine features from
two dialects to form one result? Most likely not...
Yes, there is a hughe opportunity with creating & using dialects. IMO they
challange is to create compatible dialects, which isn't very easy as I have seen
trying to be compatible to make-doc with make-doc-pro.
So I'm voting for staying with VID and extending it. Carl started VID project on
Developer IOS server and that's the right way to go. We just need to take over
most of the VID development :-))
Maybe it's still early enought to try other roads for Rebol & GUI development.
For this we should create prototype dialects to play around with and migrate
those features into VID.
Just wanted to note this, as I have seen to many forkings with good projects and
this was mostly the end of the project. Remember, continuity is Intel's only
business secret. Robert
[3/6] from: ptretter:charter at: 14-Jun-2002 8:17
I agree with Robert that extending VID is the way to go if we are reffering
to the distributable /View binary. But I think its encouraged to have
additional VIDs as long as there isnt a push to wrap it up with the /View
distributions. Problem would be the potential for redundant code and
therefore larger binary distributions when we already have almost an
extremely flexible VID already.
Paul Tretter
[4/6] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 14-Jun-2002 10:28
Hi Robert,
I guess my thinking is that VID is going to be there, and will be a
reference, but other interface dialects will, and should, emerge. I see
dialects more like a toolkit, or a library, than part of the core language.
<< Maybe it's still early enought to try other roads for Rebol & GUI
development.
For this we should create prototype dialects to play around with and migrate
those features into VID. >>
We just have to avoid VID bloat and maintain design consistency.
Fortunately, RT has the final say so it can't hurt for us to make
suggestions. :)
--Gregg
[5/6] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 14-Jun-2002 20:06
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]On Behalf Of
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>
> reference, but other interface dialects will, and should, emerge. I see
> dialects more like a toolkit, or a library, than part of the core language.
Hi, that's all OK. I just wanted to point out that fragmenting the developer
community in a group using VID, one using DVI and the next using IDV will
decrease the community power. If we all concentrate on one goal it's better.
This doesn't mean that VID shouldn't be expanded etc. it has to!
Here in Germany we have a saying like: If you try to catch two rabbits the
chance it big you won't catch any.
Adding new styles to VID is perfect, creating a complete new general GUI dialect
that's not compatible with VID... I don't know if it's that useful to spend time
with this. Robert
[6/6] from: riusa:email:it at: 17-Jun-2002 8:58
I agree with you. Sometimes Open Source projects have many problems for
this reason, since everybody thinks its idea is better than another
one... result? Lot of small projects, but no one is really powerful.
Look at (example) to Linux Window Managers. There are a lot of GUIs,
but many of them are almost equivalent... think if all these developers
(very good analyst/programmers) do concentrate their power to only a
GUI... look at KDE... look at GNOME...
Creating many projects (less resources for every one) we will advantage
the competitors (other languages, other GUIs... ).
regards.
--Alessandro--
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]On
Behalf Of
> > Gregg Irwin
> > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 6:29 PM
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> > I guess my thinking is that VID is going to be there, and will be a
> > reference, but other interface dialects will, and should, emerge. I
see
> > dialects more like a toolkit, or a library, than part of the core
language.
> Hi, that's all OK. I just wanted to point out that fragmenting the
developer
> community in a group using VID, one using DVI and the next using IDV
will
> decrease the community power. If we all concentrate on one goal it's
better.
> This doesn't mean that VID shouldn't be expanded etc. it has to!
>
> Here in Germany we have a saying like: If you try to catch two
rabbits the
> chance it big you won't catch any.
>
> Adding new styles to VID is perfect, creating a complete new general
GUI dialect
> that's not compatible with VID... I don't know if it's that useful to
spend time
> with this. Robert
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
> [rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Alessandro Manotti
Presidente dell'Associazione di volontariato O.N.L.U.S. "RIUSA"
Sito web: http://riusa.apritisesamo.net
http://riusa.150m.com
email: [riusa--email--it]
mailing-list: [riusa-ml--yahoogroups--com]
Telefono: 347.63.43.231
--
Prendi GRATIS l'email universale che... risparmia: http://www.email.it/f
Sponsor:
Il notebook che hai sempre desiderato lo trovi su Ebest
Clicca qui: http://adv2.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=551&d=17-6
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted