24 May
2007
24 May
'07
2:38 p.m.
Hi,
I agree we really need to keep JS libraries down to a maximum.
However concerning Ioana's project, I would really like to have Google
Web Toolkit considerer.
GTW allows to much better handle the relationship with the XWiki Core
and to organize the code much better. It also allows to write unit tests.
It is also very well suited for event drivent applications..
While it's true that we might not find SVG/VML/Drawing apis in GWT but
we can wrap a library in GWT so that we can write the rest of the code
in GWT
I'm currently finishing a base XWiki GWT Application providing some
client services (in addition to the server services already available in
the trunk).
Ludovic
Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
This is kind of a thread hijack, Vincent.
Indeed, there's a mess in the JS as well, as in the whole skin (the
view part of XWiki). Two years ago there was no framework used, while
last year we found prototype, scriptaculous, rico and our own AJAX
wrapper + DHTML functions. And now we're going to add JQuery and Dojo,
too. Here's my view on the matter:
- Scriptaculous isn't used. We should seek if there are any references
to it, and remove it.
- Our own implementation should be pruned, meaning that we need to
identify which functions are needed and are not provided by another
framework, rewritten using a framework, and the stuff we don't need
should be removed.
- Rico is used mainly because when Marta added some skin dynamic
features, it was already there, and she didn't feel like adding
another fwk or writing her own implementation. If we decide to replace
it with another fwk, then the only problem is that skins based on the
current finch or albatross won't be easily upgradeable.
- Prototype is used by Rico. I don't think we're using it very much,
so it can be removed.
- JQuery looks like a smaller alternative for simple skin needs.
Either we keep Rico, or we switch to JQuery, it's just a matter of
choice.
- Dojo should be used for things that require complex interaction; it
isn't needed for small things like the accordions or collapseable
panels. But for a collaborative graphical editor, it's better to use
it than make our own methods. So Dojo has its uses, and
JQuery/Rico/Prototype has other uses. However, it includes the basic
functionalities as a subset, and even some useful widgets. So the only
reason why we should not switch completely to Dojo is that it takes
longer to download and it requires more startup time.
In conclusion, we can add Dojo for the advanced editor, and keep only
one of Rico/JQuery/Prototype for simple skin needs.
Sergiu
On 5/22/07, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
--
Ludovic Dubost
Blog: http://www.ludovic.org/blog/
XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
AIM: nvludo Yahoo: ludovic
Sorry I haven't checked your proposal yet.
However the mention of "Dojo"
made me think. We're currently using Prototype in XWiki and I was
tempted to
add JQuery as there is a plugin I'm interested in using. Now you mention
Dojo. That's starting to make a lot of framework in the same space :-)
So my question to all of us:
- do we mind?
- is it ok to include several dhtml/ajax fwk? Isn't it going to
weight too
much? Can we selectively decide to include only some fwk (somehow)?
- will we be having compatibility issues? (fwiw I've checked and it
seems
jquery can be used with prototype if we're careful enough
(http://docs.jquery.com/Using_jQuery_with_Other_Libraries)
I personally haven't used these fwks so I don't have any
recommendation at
all. Funnily I've just come across this article this morning
(http://www.mrbool.com/articles/viewcomp.asp?comp=5311) but
it didn't really help...
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
You receive this message as a subscriber of the xwiki-dev(a)objectweb.org mailing list.
To unsubscribe: mailto:xwiki-dev-unsubscribe@objectweb.org
For general help: mailto:sympa@objectweb.org?subject=help
ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: http://www.objectweb.org/wws