[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: AW: [e4-dev] Why XML UI is important for us
|
Kaiping,
Fully aggre with you !!!
And regarding to your start of the discussion, and according that :
1°) "new Label(..." is a way of using existing EMF metamodel, and not
provided de facto by any standard XML implementation,
2°) "<label text="..." " is a way doable way of persisting EMF (could
be parametrized without any designer/developer action)
That means that EMF should be chosen over XML for UIs declarations, no ? :-D
Cheers,
Olivier
2009/10/9 <kfang@xxxxxx>:
>> I'm following very interested the discussion about UI on this list but I
> don't understand the difference in quality about the declaration language
> of a UI. To me it's absolutely irrelevant > if I declare a label with
>
>> new Label(...
>
>> or with
>
>> <label text="..."
>
>> That's syntactic sugar.
>
> For me, the difference is fundamental.
>
> The "new Label(..." is computer programming language (in this case Java)
> dependent and computer programming language declaration.
>
> And the "<label text="..." is declarative fonctional declaration which is
> independent of computer programming language.
>
> We can analyse the "<label text="..." very easily with others computer
> language like C++, C" or JavaScript etc.) and it isn't the case of ""new
> Label(...".
>
> On conclusion, the "<label text="..." is more universal et declarative than
> the "new Label(..."
>
>
> Kaiping FANG
> Responsable Architecture des systèmes d’Information
> Systems Architecture Manager
> CCR
> 31, rue de Courcelles
> 75008 PARIS – France
>
> Tél : +33 (0) 1 44 35 38 01
> Fax : +33 (0) 1 44 13 77 36
> Mobile : +33 (0) 6 71 29 95 75
> E-mail : kfang@xxxxxx
>
> www.ccr.fr
>
>
> |------------>
> | De : |
> |------------>
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |"Tom Seidel" <tom.seidel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |------------>
> | A : |
> |------------>
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |"'E4 Project developer mailing list'" <e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |------------>
> | Date: |
> |------------>
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |09/10/2009 13:47 |
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |------------>
> | Objet : |
> |------------>
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |AW: [e4-dev] Why XML UI is important for us |
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |------------>
> | Envoyé |
> | par : |
> |------------>
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm following very interested the discussion about UI on this list but I
> don't understand the difference in quality about the declaration language
> of a UI. To me it's absolutely irrelevant if I declare a label with
>
> new Label(...
>
> or with
>
> <label text="..."
>
> That's syntactic sugar.
>
> Your issues with developing UIs (Skill, Guideline,...) will not be resolved
> by switching to a xml declared UI, they will be just moved.
>
> The fact that people are more familiar with XML than with EMF/SWT/whatever
> makes no sense, you also have to "learn" how to declare an UI in XML.
> The problems in UI development is IMHO not the declaration syntax but the
> separation of UI and the business domain. From my experience (I'm working
> as architect also for insurance, authority,...) the best way to improve
> quality of UIs is an enforced architecture to separate UI declaration
> (regardless of which technology) and binding the UI to a domain model. But
> this is an issue in architecture, not in technology. If you separate these
> two things you will resolve most of your problems. Your lower skilled
> developers (whatever this means) can use GUI-Designer-Tools to create the
> UI satisfying the guidelines without knowing anything about the
> business-code. Then your application developers can bind the model to the
> designed ui (with APIs like Riena or Databinding).
>
> Like I said, the challenges in UI development is not the UI itself, but the
> integration into an application and the binding to a domain model.
> Therefore Eclipse already provides very good frameworks and APIs. Take a
> look at Riena; its mission is (among other things) to provide a framework
> for building such applications.
>
> The fact that EMF is IMHO a better choice for a declarative UI is diverse
> (many advantages were already mentioned).
> Take a look at the tools that are built upon EMF and compare them with
> tools for raw XML editing. I think everybody has already searched for a
> typo within a xml file. Creating new tools for EMF Models is also much
> simpler than for a xml block (which is also essential for e4-tooling).
> The next thing is that XML serialization is just another feature of EMF.
> Everything you have declared in a XML file can be represented in an EMF
> Model, so the discussion itself makes no sense due to the fact that XML is
> a subset of EMF.
> The assumption that XML is better for simple cases I cannot confirm from my
> experience, also with development-teams that have no EMF experience it
> makes no big difference.
>
>
> Last but not least I still have a feedback for the current e4: Development
> with e4 is a great new experience. Great work :)
>
> Best Regards,
> Tom Seidel
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:e4-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im
> Auftrag von kfang@xxxxxx
> Gesendet: Freitag, 9. Oktober 2009 12:10
> An: E4 Project developer mailing list
> Betreff: Re: [e4-dev] Why XML UI is important for us
>
>
> hal@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> In my experience with XSWT (similar to XWT) and the EMF-based TM, XML
>> is simple for simple cases, but very complex when the problem grows,
>> while EMF is slightly more complex for the simple cases, but scales
>> very well with increasing complexity.
>
> In our insurance application developpment avec 1500 UI forms, we hava 90 %
> of simple case and 10 % of complex case in UI developement.
>
> We perfer the simplicity of XWT than the EMF based approch because there
> isn't enough good skilled java developers in my team who can master EMF
> approch.
>
> You have to know that the skill of programming of application developers is
> very limited. But, they know very well the fonctionality of the
> applications.
>
> So, the simplicity is one "must" for us.
>
> Kaiping FANG
>
> Systems Architecture Manager
> CCR
> 31, rue de Courcelles
> 75008 PARIS – France
>
> Tél : +33 (0) 1 44 35 38 01
> Fax : +33 (0) 1 44 13 77 36
> Mobile : +33 (0) 6 71 29 95 75
> E-mail : kfang@xxxxxx
>
> www.ccr.fr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
