| RE: [ve-dev] How about separating the UI frame codes from those c ontrol codes? |
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Winchester [mailto:WINCHEST@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 5:54 AM
To: ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ve-dev] How about separating the UI frame codes from those control codes?
I think the idea of separating XML from the Java code is a great one. What the VE does right now is code for existing runtimes, so our focus now is on archiving to a .java file. If there was a good runtime for XML serialization separate from the event handling logic the VE could be made to tool for this, and in fact its architecture is designed to allow for this kind of scenario.
So, is the debate one of a runtime architecture or do you have one you'd like to see the VE tool for ?
Also - this kind of discussion is possibly better to take place on the newsgroup forum as opposed to this mailing list. The topic has been broached before but it really needs someone to lead and champion it, and while I'm sure you will find no shortage of people interested in debating it on the forum the hard part is turning this into concrete development items,
Best regards,
Joe Winchester
Please respond to ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent by: ve-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
To: ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc:
Subject: [ve-dev] How about separating the UI frame codes from those control codes?
Hi everyone there! I'm new to this mailing list.
First must say you've done a great job, that's what I'm looking for since
I've met with those boring swing matters, you know, especially those
layouts. Being a java newbie, I'm totally unfamiliar with layouts, heh.
And I've had the idea of separating UI codes from my "true source codes"
after using VE for about 2 days. That idea is not new, it's copied from the
.frm file used in Delphi, they use them to describe the form layouts,
components, etc. Though not very familiar with MVC pattern, I think it's
focusing on this matter too. And from some articles introducing (or maybe
advocating ;^) XAML in Longhorn, the next generation of windows platform.
Actually it's a trivial (in my own personal opinion) technique about using
XML to describe the User Interface, and all they were advocating is just
that Avalon could interpret XAML to windows Form style as well as to a web
page style. So if microsoft could, why couldn't we?
To support this feature will give us much more flexibility, and we could
ask someone who's good at UI design to "draw" the interface, we just write
our own codes, as event handlers to UI components, or some background works
with or without UI businesses. This also helps to make codes much clearer,
and change SOME UI features without changing any codes.
I've seen Dave have raised this problem with "How about XMI"
blah...thinking maybe we're meaning the same thing.
_________________________________________________________________
与联机的朋友进行交流，请使用 MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn
_______________________________________________
ve-dev mailing list
ve-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ve-dev