Re: widgets plan proposal

> On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 10:28  AM, Adam Megacz wrote:
> > You have a really good point here.  Behaviors logically belong in
> > xwt.lib, yet they should be themeable as well!
> 
> I don't actually understand this. xwt.lib is code that is theme 
> independent, right? In which case, behaviors still belong in xwt.theme.

I agree with David (apart from the namespace layout :P)

> The question is do behaviors belong in xwt.theme.<behavior>, or just in 
> plain xwt.theme.
> 
> How many behaviors do we currently have? I thought there were only 2-3, 
> in which case wouldn't it be better to keep them in xwt.theme? That 
> way, you don't have to import another namespace just for 2-3 more 
> templates.

The current count is 7:
clickable
draggable*
focusable
onedimensional
redirect
repeatable
selection_mux

* Not sure whether this will work

> > How about we have xwt.lib.<behavior> postapply xwt.theme.<behavior>?
> > So xwt.lib.focusable postapplies xwt.theme.focusable, which lets
> > themes implement theme-specific focusing behaviors.
> 
> This seems like a complicated way to do things, just so we can 
> reference xwt.lib.<behavior> instead of xwt.theme.<behavior>.  Why not 
> just keep it like the rest  and have xwt.theme.<behavior> preapply 
> xwt.lib.<behavior> if it wants to.

Apart from the namespace layout, on this point I'm 100% in agreement with
David.

> Also, seeing as xwt.theme doesn't actually have a theme in it, I think 
> its documentation should focus on the specific API themes have to 
> implement. ie, where traps/variables have to be, and what they have to 
> do. A theme should follow this explicitly so the preapply's in 
> xwt.widget work well, and so a heavyweight developer can use xwt.theme 
> directly and get a uniform interface.

Again, other than namespace layout, I 100% agree with this point.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/dev