29 Dec
2010
29 Dec
'10
11:58 a.m.
Hi Thomas, all
On 12/29/2010 09:51 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
For the macros that come with the platform it's not such a bad solution,
third party macro authors will still have 2b as a solution.
The issue with 2 in general is that the css becomes immensely
fragmented: you'd have a separate CSS file fetch for each macro that
needs styles, which slows down page loading. I guess this is the very
reason why we have everything in colibri.css at the moment. Which is
why, for the macros that come with the platform by default, we should
have a solution that optimizes this and grabs all the css in one fetch.
Of course, we could make it an 'on demand', meaning that this
platform.css will be asked for by the macros in the platform that know
they need it. Also, we can also improve the skin extension to make it
generate a file from multiple ".use" calls that it receives, but it
should still be one single file, to allow caching on the client side.
well, well... :) I guess when it comes to layout and decoration, it's
gonna be necessarily bound to a renderer. e.g. in the columns case, I
don't know how to make sure that columns will happen on any renderer. I
do have groups around each column allowing a potential other renderer to
lay them out the way it needs them, but more than that I don't know how
to do.
Unless we make these decoration notions (or some of them), part of the
abstract syntax tree model (i.e. invent blocks for it, or reserved
attributes at XDOM level, etc). It will be hard to cover it all, though.
Thanks,
Anca
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 16:13, Anca
Luca<lucaa(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
2b makes it a bit tough to customize, which might be ok for third party
macros, but for the platform macros, we might want to leave room for this.
Hi guys,
Short story:
Where to put the css which is needed by java macros (e.g. the columns
layouting of the container macro)
1/ in colibri.css
2/ in a .css included on demand by the macro
a) from platform resources (using ssfx)
b) from the jar (using ssrx)
c) from an object in a page with ssx
3/ refactor the skin concept and create a 'platform css' to store all
these and not be affected by skin customization.
Long story:
I can see I've caused the web standards tests to fail for the trunk
(http://hudson.xwiki.org/job/xwiki-product-enterprise-tests/org.xwiki.enterp…)
because of the inline style attributes used by the columns layout of the
container, whijch is now used on the main page.
Now, I would like us to agree about where to store the styles needed by
the java macros to work right, such as the container macro with columns
layout. The options I see are:
1/ as until today (e.g. box macro, warning, error, info, etc), in
colibri.css/toucan.css/otherskinwehave.css. I don't like this solution
too much because it means that when another skin is used, things won't
work anymore unless the person writing the new skin takes care of
copying all these "things that must be there". The advantage of this is
having a single .css file to load on page load, the disadvantage being
that their css is loaded on all pages, regardless of it being used or not.
We can't really see that as a solution, it kid of work for us because
we have access to colibri skin but we have to find a real extendable
solution for anyone who write a java macro.
2/ loading of the styles on demand, each macro loads its style when it
needs it
a) from a .css file located in the platform resources, which the macro
has to include using the ssfx plugin when is executed -- much like a
wiki macro would to with a ssx.
b) from a .css file located in the macro archive (using ssrx), which the
macro includes when executed.
c) from a ssx page
c) has the advantage of being very very much more easy to change than a)
and finally than b) which is the hardest to customize. But on the other
side c) means the java macro depends on a page, which is not that good.
Note that "cascading" customization is possible for all these choices
(adding an extra css with rules to overwrite the rules in the default
css for the macro) and that in my view, it's enough, since the idea is
that the layout should be preserved no matter what (e.g. a user might
want to add a red border to the columns, but not make the columns
display as two paragraphs instead of two columns).
I think the only clean solution from extension architecture POV is b).
3/ refactoring the whole skin thing and creating a "platform" css, which
contains things that should work regardless of the skin used. Pros: it's
an adaptation of the current approach (1/), that solves the problem.
Cons: takes longer, might be very hard to separate what's platform and
what's skin.
For me this is almost as bad as 1/
These being said, I think I prefer 2/ if 3/ is not realistic, and for
the container macro at least, I would prefer to implement 2b).
Side note: be careful with css and macros it's easy to make it
unusable for anything except XHTML renderer.
Thanks,
Anca
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs