[news.eclipse.technology.riena] Re: Riena Gui

[Christian Campo <christian.campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Tom,

I was orginally thinking of UFace which was also on our radar. But we are not
fixed to any lib yet. We have a certain vision on what we think the UI should look like. You can see
that Mauels posting at the beginning of this thread
and also here http://eclipsesummit.org/summiteurope2007/presentations/ESE2007_Riena.pdf
we have a certain idea how the UI should look like. That includes the top of the UI with
the window, the toolbar, the navigation on the left.

But sure thats only a proposed look and others might have different ideas.

Promising things in that direction I have seen so far are
- SWT Ribbons http://www.hexapixel.com/ribbon/ (are there any patent problems with that with Microsoft BTW ?)
- Nebula and specifically the PShelf although we need a little more than it has.

So any idea that gets us closer that proposed sample I think helps us and helps others (like Manuel).

regards

christian


Tom Schindl schrieb:
> Christian Campo schrieb:
> > Absolutly. we have looked and played already with Nebula and its 
> > certainly an attractive
> > option. We might as well of course use UFace. What are your plans Tom 
> > in supporting Nebula
> > somehow ?
>
> Do we talk about UFace or JFace?
>
> If we talk about UFace:
> ------------------------
> Well. In fact we will support some widgets from there in future (it's on 
> my plan list after implementation of the core SWT-Widgets in done :-).
>
> The nice thing about UFace-Design is that you can extend if fairly 
> easily your own e.g. we have a SwingX-Implementation sitting ontop
> the core Swing-Impl :-)
>
> If we talk about JFace:
> ------------------------
> We are trying to provide Viewer-Implementations for Nebula-Components if 
> possible or at least align the JFace-API in a way it can be consumed by 
> nebula-implementations.
>
> As with other projects if you need something JFace / UFace (which is my 
> personal project :-) doesn't provide currently and you think it is worth 
> to be integrated we'd really like to know :-)
>
> Tom