I've pushed an initial set of classes for this Express project. I did not hook it up to the main build of flex-asjs yet but you should be able to build it from the project itself.
I basically extended the standard HTML classes and added some default beads. —peter On 1/3/17, 3:11 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote: >I think name should came after we have something with a bit of face that >could inspire us, for the meantime I'll go a codename route with whatever >name. > >2017-01-03 21:07 GMT+01:00 Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com>: > >> I like Express too! >> >> - Josh >> >> On Jan 3, 2017 10:31 AM, "Peter Ent" <p...@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> > I think "Express" isn't a bad name for this. It implies that you can >>get >> > something running quickly. >> > >> > Another name I thought of was "Star" (FlexJS Star). >> > >> > A third choice might be "Prime", meaning the main one to use. >> > >> > ‹peter >> > >> > On 1/3/17, 12:14 PM, "Dev LFM" <developer...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >I've been listening this thread, sorry my intrusion.. >> > > >> > >Why not simply: >> > > >> > >- ComponentBase for the current set without beads, and "Component" >>for >> the >> > >ones with default beads included? >> > > >> > >I like "Express" too but not making much sense to me. >> > > >> > >My 2 cents ^^ >> > > >> > >2017-01-03 16:53 GMT+00:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>: >> > > >> > >> Hi, >> > >> >> > >> The original thread is another example of where PAYG becomes PITA. >> On >> > >> another thread, Om wants to bake in HTML sanitization by default. >> IMO, >> > >> these are things that should go in a heavier component set with >>more >> > >> things baked in. IMO, this new, heavier component set would be the >> > >> default for FlexJS. No more forgetting to add DataBinding beads, >>or >> > >> SimpleCSSValuesImpl, etc. Fewer tags to write. >> > >> >> > >> I've asked Peter to start on it so you can see how to bake stuff in >> and >> > >> how much simpler it will make our examples. I think it will help >>in >> > >> getting folks started with fewer problems. I think we've proven >>that >> we >> > >> can composite basic things into more complex things. >> > >> >> > >> But, we need a good name for this set. I don't like "Heavy". >>Makes >> me >> > >> think it would be too fat and slow. I've ruled out for now >>"Kitchen >> > >> Sink", and "Full" (because it won't contain every bead). I've >>thought >> > >> about "Medium", "Typical", "Common", "Popular", "POC" (Proof of >> > >>Concept)", >> > >> "RP" (Rapid Prototyping). Don't like any of them. What name would >> > >> suggest that it is not on the place to start but that you could >>use it >> > >>in >> > >> production if you don't run into size/performance issues? >> > >> >> > >> Thoughts? >> > >> -Alex >> > >> >> > >> On 1/2/17, 11:20 PM, "piotrz" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> >Alex, >> > >> > >> > >> >That's what I'm missing. It's a bit better cause when I add bead >> > >> >"ItemRendererDataBinding" my getter has been fired, although >>binding >> is >> > >> >still not working. I've just pushed my code. - Not sure what can >>be >> > >> >wrong. >> > >> > >> > >> >I have to admit I'm still thinking to much Flex instead of FlexJS >>:) >> > >> > >> > >> >Piotr >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >----- >> > >> >Apache Flex PMC >> > >> >piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com >> > >> >-- >> > >> >View this message in context: >> > >> >http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble. >> > >> com/FlexJS-MDL-Why-bindin >> > >> >g-is-not-working-in-MDL-example-tp57738p57795.html >> > >> >Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at >> > >>Nabble.com. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > > > >-- > >Carlos Rovira >Director General >M: +34 607 22 60 05 >http://www.codeoscopic.com >http://www.avant2.es > >Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener >información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por >error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y >proceda a su destrucción. > >De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le >comunicamos >que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC >S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del >servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, >rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a >nuestras >oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación >necesaria.
