Re: Clarification of layout proposal

> Sure, why not? I had never really formalised how the theme-independent 
> code would sit in xwt.lib, I just sorta defined it as xwt.lib: "theme 
> independent code goes here". I really don't care what preapply 
> structure happens in there. Hell, there might be ten different 
> focusable templates for whatever screwed up reason.

It's confusing and unclear, that's why.

With the proposed layout, which is very similar to what you advocated* all
angles are covered.  The problems you 'see' are not problems but you're
subjective opinions on what the directories should contain.

* only now you're arguing over some semantics and you don't want to have the
'standard theme' separate from the 'theming code', which Rod and I who have
been heavily writing widgets can see will cause problems because you'll
essentially have to copy entire widgets for the sake of one box difference.1

You have xwt.standard, a standard xwt theme, which satisfies Adam's worry of
xwt not working brilliantly without theming.  The widgets here would
preapply stuff in xwt.widget and add boxen/images.

You have xwt.widget, a place where good documentation on widget usage can be
found, and all the useful preapplies are included (the preapply separation
that you want).  Most themes' widgets would just preapply the stuff here.

You have xwt.theme, the theming code (that you now argue should go in
xwt.lib.theme which is perverse IMO) which covers the general layout /
interaction code for the majority of themes.  Themes' widgets that don't
want to use the preapplies dictated by xwt.widget, would use this.  Also,
decent docs on how to create theme versions of each widget would be here.

You have xwt.lib, the library code that all themes would want to use,
directly or indirectly.  Completely custom themes would most likely use
these.

To be honest, I'm getting sick of repeating myself on this only for you to
argue something else.  No matter what I/we say you want to change it.  It's
the powerful, simple layout that you wanted.  It's something Rod and Andrew
stated they were happy with.  Can't you just bend your mindset a little bit?
Your recent arguments are beyond a joke... just wanting to move stuff for
the sake of it.

Can't you just agree to something?  We agree, you change, we agree more, you
change more.  Originally you had valid points and I/we compromised and gave
way.  Then we settle on something that 1) you suggested and 2) everybody
liked.  Now it's petty points to adjust it further and in perverse ways
(subdirs preappling parentdirs!?).  And it's verging on infuriating.  Not to
mention the way you ignore big problems with having the theming code
(xwt.theme) overlay()ed with a theme which will try to preapply the theming
code (xwt.theme) - I've repeatedly stated that this crashes xwt as it is.

The xwt.standard, xwt.widget, xwt.theme, xwt.lib is clear and concise.  And,
tbh, I'd rather go with xwt.widget.theme and xwt.widget.lib than go with
xwt.lib.theme.

Please, just *agree* for once.  Otherwise I'm done with this ridiculousness.
It's wasting my time now.  I've spent more time in the last 2 weeks in the
dev list arguing over semantics and other such crap than I have doing
widgets.  You'd have had a working table and refactored tab[pane] by now.

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