r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

btiffin
25-May-2007
[2555]
Pekr;  Yep RT has promised things...but (and this is where being 
out of the computer

biz for seven years may be of benefit to me) it seems things are 
really starting to
accelerate.
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2556]
petr, can you elaborate more on abstraction? was my proposal too 
abstract or not abstract enough?
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2557]
the direction of abstraction ... I was not sure about isolation of 
data from visual representation ...
Rebolek
25-May-2007
[2558]
just one last quick note: I think that having a look at MUI will 
be good - MUI resizes buttons automatically to fit the text in, there 
are no absolute coordinates. Someone may think, that absolute coordinates 
are good (bitmap graphic-heavy people), but absolute coordinations 
are PURE EVIL, at least from internalization/Localization POV. And 
if the GUI is not made with internalization in mind from the beginning, 
it's not possible to add it later (if it was, there won't be about 
forty people resing every button in Vista for every language edition 
manually)
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2559x2]
Petr, don't forget though, that "decentralized" design is exactly 
what Carl is opposed to.
too much isolation of data or not enough isolation of data?
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2561]
no, not centralised vs decentralised design, but the whole things. 
I miss division of tasks ...
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2562]
Gabriele;  I agree.  As an end-user, a single (perhaps extensible) 
vision has always
been far more appealing to me than design by commitee bloat.
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2563]
Rebolek: i have programmed a MUI like gui engine in AmigaE some 12 
years ago.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2564]
too much - well, not too much - just the whole idea - are we sure 
we want to let user choose, in what form he wants data being represented? 
I am not sure it is neede? Would you find it really usefull?
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2565]
And Pekr;  If the design include points of extensibility, thats where 
"we" get to play.  :)
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2566x2]
ok, so it's the same concern Carl has that it would be too complicated.
i can only answer that concern by writing a prototype. there's no 
way a "it won't be complicated" will convince Carl or you :)
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2568x2]
Brian - misunderstood :-) decentralisation = decentralisation of 
tasks - someone does design, some group works on docs, some groups 
are rebol evangelists on internet, some group might help new users, 
etc., I don't want to bloat anything ;-)
not sure if complicated, but question to you - would you find the 
practical need to have different representation of data? I mean, 
as an app user?
Rebolek
25-May-2007
[2570]
Gabriele that's good. It's just that this is one thing that is nor 
adressed in current VID, RebGUI etc and it would be really great 
if new VID will have this from the begining. Take it just as a wish 
:)
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2571]
petr, isn't that exactly what is happening? Carl works on design, 
some group will work on docs (DocBase), other groups will work on 
code (DevBase), other groups can be here helping users as they have 
always done
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2572]
but you see, Carl has PITS embeded in his mind... the problem is 
that if you want power in a GUI at some point, some things need to 
be more extensive.  which can imply complexity.
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2573]
Ok.  I'm all for that.  Sign me up for some grunt work...  :)
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2574]
otherwise, we should just port current vid and add a few things in 
the dialect.
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2575]
rebolek: i would prefer a simpler, more powerful approach than the 
one used in mui. however, probably mui is easier to understad to 
people (html tables even easier), so we'll need to stick to that.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2576]
Gabriele-  no, it is NOT happening. I believe you release R3 sooner 
than we might come familiar with all those needed systems. Has anyone 
discussed, e.g. if/how we allow localisation of docs? Etc.?
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2577x2]
IIRC think carl really likes the simplicity and power of GLayout's 
proportional sizing engine.
its a prototype so yess the *code* has some ugly bits... but the 
layout concept is very agile, and makes tidy guis with little effort 
and understanding needed... its acutally much simpler than current 
vVID.
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2579]
max, that's exactly what i did 12 years ago. no news to me. i wanted 
to try something new but that's not going to work so i won't.
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2580x2]
And sorry Pekr;  I get my verbology wrong sometimes...  Wasn't meant 
as a diss.

I actually think, along with this heated debate, things are going 
to accelerate and

we are going to have more chance to get our hands dirty than any 
of us may be able
to handle.  It's going to great.
going to BE great.
Rebolek
25-May-2007
[2582]
Gabriele: I'm not trying to push MUI aprroach somehow, it's just 
that I'd like to see new VID to be localization-friendly
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2583x4]
my point earlier was I'd like R3 to have time to actually try out 
different approaches, have them working code, let the community try 
out, maybe even create different propositions and take the time to 
use and have fun.
then the best parts of each idea usually really just pop up as *obvious*.
but having a june 30 date just allow a single track to move along 
so... I understand why/how you are approaching the whole thing... 
and yess I think you are courageous for asking openly here.
you just *knew* what was comming  ;-)
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2587]
Maxim;  That can be good...but it can also be dangerous.  Everyone 
here is too smart
and has too many good ideas.  May become overwhelming.  :)
Gabriele
25-May-2007
[2588]
max, i hoped to prove carl wrong, but he seems to be right :P
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2589x2]
hehe
Gabriele, team work depends on all aspects of the work to be teamed.
btiffin
25-May-2007
[2591]
And I don't mean too smart in a bad way.  The computer IQ in this 
forum is off the scale
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2592x4]
which is why Carl is right.
since Carl want's to retain control over the view .
just asking people about what they want obviously collides... everyone 
has different needs and POV.
I've always thought that everyone is *right* by default.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2596]
there is not team, there was no team. Team needs rules. To set rules 
you have to adhere. If you break the rules, you should be dismissed 
from team after some time. If ppl do adhere to rules, team has its 
sense ...
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2597x3]
so its hard to merge the ideas, obviously.
Pekr, that is what I am saying.
but who choses the rules, who is right, who is wrong... bla bla bla.... 
you can end up with the same wars within anyways.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2600]
With Rebol, things are often aproached in non-organised, jumpy kind 
of way ... few questions, few months break, some doc, few months 
break, then release, which is even more different to what was agreed 
upon :-) just exagerrating, but you get the idea ...
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2601]
why is why I thouhgt a more open, long term dev cycle would have 
been better.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2602]
Maxim - rules of the team ... ideas have no rules ;-)
Maxim
25-May-2007
[2603]
people have ideas... let them prove them, if you will.
Pekr
25-May-2007
[2604]
Gabriele should form rules, because he has most of the info: