Hi Piotr,
subclass will be most to test the use of element.classList, a part from the
reverse order. I think element.classList will remove the need of much code
in jewel components about how to setup classes in those components

2018-03-12 19:27 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]>:

> Since it is some kind of exception which you are trying to resolve, you
> should create beads (layouts) which indicates resolution for that exception
> in their name. - At least that's how I think about PAYG.
>
> Btw. Sub classing UIBase to have an different order in className is a bit
> overkill to me.
>
> 2018-03-12 19:21 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>:
>
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > These layout classes have worked fine for dozens of example.  They are
> > small, simple and stupid.
> >
> > I don't understand why, if you want vertical layout, you want to set a
> > child's display to "inline-block".  That would not layout vertically
> > unless you are counting in line-wrapping.  To me, that is an exception
> > case, and extra code and an additional layout class is the PAYG way to
> > deal with it.
> >
> > To me, there is no excess HTML code because we do not generate much HTML
> > at all!  We do run a bunch of JS that creates HTMLElements, but that is
> > not tags in an HTML file that has to be parse by the browser, so other
> > than some opinion of what is "best", we need to run profiling to
> determine
> > the trade-offs.  Harbs claims that having JS set the style object is
> > better than having JS set classnames.  You will need to prove him wrong.
> >
> > And still, I don't believe whether we use the style object or not is
> going
> > to cause people to not use Royale.  We can clean this up later.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/12/18, 11:11 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos
> Rovira"
> > <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi Alex,
> > >
> > >no, I want the normal effect of a vertical layout, since finaly is get
> in
> > >both ways.
> > >The problem for me is :
> > >
> > >1) people that wants to change it must subclass layout to modify,
> instead
> > >of override css rule
> > >2) there's an excess of html code since in each component inside the
> > >layout
> > >the current approach with inline styles are generating the style
> attribute
> > >for all components, so this ends in bloated code that I don't see in any
> > >example of UI sets out there
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >2018-03-12 18:41 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 3/12/18, 10:11 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos
> > >>Rovira"
> > >> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I still don't get why, if your Button is a subcomponent, some
> > >>framework
> > >> >> code was setting display style on it unless you were using a layout
> > >> >>class
> > >> >> in the component itself.
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >that's the side effect of inline styling, as I put the button inside
> a
> > >> >vertical layout, the layout imposes display: block
> > >> >while my css dictates display: inline-block. The browser shows the
> > >>later
> > >> >strikes out. For me that behavior can be right
> > >> >if I can change easily from CSS overriding rule, but not if is a line
> > >>of
> > >> >code inside a framework that makes me override a whole class
> > >> >to change an inline style.
> > >>
> > >> Just to be sure I understand, your goal was to use vertical layout but
> > >> make one child not layout vertically?  Sort of like "includeInLayout"
> in
> > >> Flex?
> > >>
> > >> Handling exceptions usually requires more code.  So it sounds like you
> > >>are
> > >> creating layouts that allow for exceptions, which seems like a
> > >>reasonable
> > >> thing to do.  The existing layouts will be more simple (and
> essentially
> > >> stupid) but will do the job with the least code when exceptions are
> not
> > >> needed.
> > >>
> > >> That's how I understand it.
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >Carlos Rovira
> > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
> > >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> > 7Ccfb1cb035125479752cb08d5
> > >8844b0f1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> > 7C636564751009995999&s
> > >data=ULF%2BQF6eX22uPYf%2BgxjeJL6xIzk18iFBhuPI5Wgvwfo%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
>



-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Reply via email to