11 Oct
2010
11 Oct
'10
2:53 p.m.
On Oct 11, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 08:49, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Sounds good to me. Who would be interested to work on this?
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi all,
On Oct 10, 2010, at 11:52 PM, Sorin Burjan wrote:
In my understanding, we should distinct:
1) the velocity templates
2) CSS, pictures and so on
For 1), for ease of maintenance we need to share as much as possible. For
2), we should just be able, based on 1), to fully customize the visual
representation of 1). IMO, ideally, 1) should be shared by all 2). At the
same time, we should keep the current behavior that allow users to customize
1) and 2) themselves more deeply, but we should avoid to maintain several 1)
ourselves.
Note that 1) should be driven by building an unstyled accessible (WAI
compliant) document that could be properly styled in many ways to fullfil
the need of 2). This why I see no point to maintain different 1). Moreover
that 1) could be built conditionally when require. Maintaining several 1) is
just doubling the work without much benefit IMHO. I see just one really good
reason to have several 1), which is to support different level of markup,
for example, we may think about starting a 1) that use HTML5 feature during
a transitioning period, until its is well adopted.
WDYT ? +1
In time we should make Colibri, Toucan and other skins to be independent
of each other. By doing this, they will be more easily maintained
They should be independent but that doesn't make more maintainable, quite
the opposite since it means sharing less.
Instead we need to find ways to make skins more easily maintainable and I
think this means sharing more between skins based on the same "concepts",
i.e. having skin "variants" instead of completely new skins. Actually I
don't know what makes a skin easy to write and easy to maintain.
What I see is that some webapp have lots of skins for example wordpress so
it seems it's possible to have lots of skin. I'm still not sure what element
of our skin system makes it hard to maintain our skins.
Any idea?
+1 for deprecating Albatros and keeping independancy of 2)
and targeting unity of 1)
Denis
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>> . And
>> Albatross is obsolete by it's design.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sorin B.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/2010 8:32 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Marius
>>>
>>> On 10/10/2010 03:21 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to propose that we don't maintain the Albatross skin
anymore,
>>>> since it's time consuming to port all the UI improvements and fixes
to
> it.
>>>>
>>>> The skin will not be removed from the distribution yet, since it's
> still
>>>> the base skin on which Toucan and Colibri are built, although we should
>>>> try to fix this dependency in the near future.