On 3/15/18, 1:57 PM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>2018-03-15 20:20 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > >> 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. >> > >I'd like to focus as well on SWF, but I think there's so much work in that >part >Don't know...I would like to maintain structure and as well try to see if >we can have >SWF, but I don't want to promise anything at this moment. When I started >with >SVG and see the problems for SVG in SWF, I renounce to the SWF part. Now >that >I'm mostly on CSS3, I could check again if is possible without having more >headaches >For Bootstrap, Semantic and MDL, I think will not be possible without more >people >working on it. To support SWF, an AdvancedCSSValuesImpl needs to be written that handles all of the CSS that Bootstrap uses. That's still not a full CSS implementation, so it might be doable, but really for SWF support we only need to get the boxes in the right places so the implementation doesn't have to be perfect. > > >> >> 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. >> > >IMO, that will confuse people. If we make views to be in themes, people >will take this >as a best practice, and will follow. But anyone can do what they want. >People could make >a library and have css colors in it, and then override in a theme, and >that's not wrong >But, I'll try to make views in themes if I can for methodology and >separation of concerns. >Even if a view in MDL coincides with a view in Bootstrap, I think the >right >option is to have >both in both themes. At least in our official themes. Then people can do, >and I'm sure they'll do >what they think better for their concrete use cases. Duplication is bad too. It might be that we have a component set called CSSThemableComponents that has views that set the structure that MDL and Bootstrap want if they are in fact the same down to EVERY attribute. I think that MDL and Bootstrap will use different class names on the elements. Even the Flat theme for Bootstrap might use different class names on the elements. Not sure. I guess you'll find out when you try to make it work and then we can discuss how to organize what is being shared. First things, first. See if you can get Bootstrap to work as-is on JS in Royale. Good luck, -Alex
