Re: Widget Architecture

On Thursday, April 3, 2003, at 02:54  PM, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>> The only reason I'm against that is that if somebody forgets to call
>> xwt.theme(), their UI renders in a totally wacked-out, bizarre manner,
>> usually leaving them wondering "what the heck happened"?
>
> You keep bringing this up, Adam, and without a clear reason why this 
> is a bad
> thing.

In the long term, it's not that big a deal, because the applications 
won't be handling themes. They'll just use the default library, and the 
builtin will make calls on the overlay.

App developers really shouldn't be fiddling with the way the widget 
library works/overlays to make their apps work. They should just expect 
the xwt.widget and xwt.theme interfaces to be provided, and a default 
theme will be applied.

It's the only way to make sure developers don't screw up the natural 
multiplatform model we have here. Otherwise, this will end up like 
Java, with things like lovely hardcoded "C:\Document and ..." paths. 
Then they'll whine on Slashdot when the 'write once, run anywhere' 
doesn't work.

So once again, the only real point I can see here is to have a 
reference implementation sitting next to the docs in xwt.theme. It's 
not really a big deal either way.

d


_______________________________________________
http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/dev