RE: [e4-dev] how to contribute to toolkit model ?

["yves (yingmin) yang" <yves.yang@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I suppose you don't know XAML concept. It is in fact an extended XML to map
dynamically and directly to Java library. It is very easy to support all
other frameworks, or can be used directly in XWT like some components of
Nebula. 

Best regards
Yves YAN G
-----Original Message-----
From: e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Erdal Karaca
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 10:20 PM
To: E4 Project developer mailing list
Subject: Re: [e4-dev] how to contribute to toolkit model ?

Excuse me if this is off-topic:

You should not bother about which ui framework to integrate into the
core of e4. Instead there should be the question of how to harmonize
all of them and how to provide the needed infrastructure to make all
of those frameworks co-working in a uniform way...

At present, TMF seems to be state-of-the-art, and xwt might be simpler
for beginners to apply.
I imagine people asking: Why did you not integrate scala or glimmer
for declarative ui, or why not using superFX, or that
super-easy-to-use-thingy?

IMHO, there should be as many (declarative) ui frameworks as needed,
as long as there is a uniform way of using them in the target
platform...

2009/8/31 Kevin McGuire <Kevin_McGuire@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
>> I wanted to weigh in on this from an RCP trainer/evangelist
>> perspective. My personal desire is that e4 provide increased
>> flexibility while at the same time simplifying things (and shortening
>> the learning curve). In my opinion, adding modeling and EMF to the
>> list of things that an RCP developer needs to learn would make things
>> much more complex. I know we are already using EMF for the modeled
>> workbench, but I'm still hoping that EMF will not become a pre-
>> requisite skill for RCP developers.
>
> I agree with these goals.  WRT the modelled workbench UI work in e4, I
> believe it's true presently that the average RCP developer does not need
to
> learn EMF, but it depends on the task.
>
> If you're assembling a UI (create parts, toolbar and menu items, etc.) you
> presently must use the EMF editor, but that doesn't really mean learning
> much if any of EMF (I would be a good example :> ).  And conceivably we
> could replace it with another editor that didn't expose EMF at all.
>
> If you're creating new part types (e.g. a new kind of trim, some kind of
> part that sits between workbench window and perspective, etc.), that is if
> you're extending our model, then yes you'll need to learn EMF.  But I
think
> this case will be very special, akin to being an expect at hacking the
> presentation framework (which too I think most RCP developers should
> successfully be able to avoid).
>
> Thus, I think the right blend is powerful representation to facility
> modularity, flexibility, and stronger tools, with access to that
> representation for the small percentage who want to do highly
sophisticated
> customization.  Simple things remain simple, complex things become
possible.
>
> Regards,
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.58/2306 - Release Date: 08/16/09
06:09:00