Sounds like we are mostly in agreement. A couple of thoughts: 1) Using Bootstrap CSS as-is should work on JS but won't work on SWF since we don’t yet have support in SWF code for all of the fancy CSS in Bootstrap. But I wouldn't let that stop us from making this work on JS.
2) I'm undecided on where the viewbead goes. Maybe it doesn't matter. IMO there should be a component SWC in frameworks/libs and frameworks/js/libs with classes that represent the top-level components and with a defaults.css that dictates the beads so the beads would go in the component SWC. And then styling-specific classes, assets and CSS go in Theme SWCs. IOW, Bootstrap is not a Theme in Royale, it is a component set. Just like we have a Basic component SWC and then a Basic.css theme. Then Bootstrap themes like Flat would go in a Theme as a .css file or a .swc if it is more than just a .css file. If a viewbead is required to get a specific look for a specific theme, then it can go in a theme swc. But if all themes need the same view bead (the same HTML structure) then that should go in a component SWC. My 2 cents, -Alex On 3/15/18, 11:51 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >HI Alex, > >2018-03-15 19:34 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > >> >> If you are saying you will have JewelTheme.swc that contains SVG and >> assets in one folder and then other folders with only CSS for setting >> colors that's fine. If you need SVG in in the Blue theme and have to >>turn >> it into a SWC as well, that is also fine. The main point was to avoid >> having blue.css and red.css in the one JewelTheme.swc. >> > >Right, that's the point now have a common theme (JewelTheme) and a second >derived theme for colors and other possible changes >What is still to decide is if we should have blue, red, orange, green,.. >or >maybe blue-red, blue-orange,...and then red-blue, red-orange,... >and more for gradients. Maybe this is the final part on "definitions" or >"foundations" to decide. > > >> IMO, if we want to support Bootstrap, we should do it by encapsulation >> their HTML structures, not by trying to emulate their visuals. Then >>other >> Bootstrap themes will "just work". Again, Royale is primarily in the >> business of encapsulating common patterns. If every Bootstrap user must >> fashion a Button out of a <div> and <label> and <input> and give those >> tags certain attributes so the Bootstrap CSS will take effect, then a >> Bootstrap.swc for Royale would contain view beads that generate those >>tags >> with those attributes. Another way of thinking about it is to take two >> different Bootstrap websites, look at the HTML DOM, find the common >> patterns, and those patterns are what the view bead generates. I >>thought >> MDL worked the same way. We are creating our own component set at first >> just to make debugging simple, but also to make it possible to write >> really simple HTML that isn't completely styleable and to avoid >>licensing >> issues, but now you are creating view beads that set up a particular >>HTML >> so you can style it with your CSS. If you love Bootstrap and want to >>use >> Bootstrap to get our default Royale look, that's fine with me, as long >>as >> you can stay away from licensing issues. >> >> >well, I think that's brilliant! :), I didn't think on this from that >perspective. >So instead of emulate, we can use it's own css by using view beads. >I think I'll give this a try to make a project to see how this will work. >If this is ok, we'll have the main scenario delineated and can simply >start >the work :) > >MDL library had the problem that is was limited to it's own namespace >I created "mdl:Button" or "mdl:TextField", and the structure in html was >what MDL expected >now we have our own royale way through "jewel", and we can have different >themes that will >encapsulate their own view beads, this was a point of discussion with >@Piotr this morning >in an issue thread and maybe this is a great way to exemplarize what we >can >do with views in themes >instead in the library > >btw, I never used a ViewBead, we have already docs on how to use it? or >maybe you can point me to a class >using a view bead. > >Finaly, I always think we must have our own style and that's where more >work will be pushed >But I think is important to set the complete scenario so if I can end a >Bootstrap effort, other can. >Maybe I could go per component, setting up different themes for >Jewel, Bootstrap, Semantic and MDL, and then >go to the next control, and so on... but main should be ours! :) > >Thanks > > >-- >Carlos Rovira >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6a1a27dd2b904fa0473908d5 >8aa5d77b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636567367251534018&s >data=KKb%2BtzbEmTVJ4l8A4Q%2FZYOlslPcZH5i11KQD2AsoJ2k%3D&reserved=0
