World: r3wp
[!REBOL3 GUI]
older newer | first last |
Graham 18-Feb-2010 [837] | Presumably there are some fundamentals that have to be solved before the esthetics can be dealt with |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [838] | Graham, correct. |
Graham 18-Feb-2010 [839] | Any progress? |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [840] | I'm busy with something else right now. Hope to continue tomorrow. Carl is working on docs. |
Pekr 18-Feb-2010 [841] | good to hear Carl is documenting his ideas for the GUI. Is Cyphre already doing some low-level work? :-) Is there actually any priority for low level work? E.g. unicode display, better cross-platform font handling, draw improvements, transparent top windows, etc.? |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [842] | Cyphre is down with the flu right now and a sporadic internet connection due to snow, so I have no immediate status of what he's doing, other than waiting for the host kit, but what he's shown me, based on a separate AGG build, shows that there are a lot of ideas for what to do. |
Pekr 18-Feb-2010 [843] | some two or more weeks ago he told me he is working on some demo, showing some AGG capabilities. That is probably stuff you saw? Will it be demoed? :-) Or is it just internal build to have some ground for further architecture improvement talks? |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [844x2] | He was testing the bottleneck for parsing and drawing DRAW blocks as quickly as possible, and he calculated that the bottleneck for PARSE was much lower than that for AGG's draw routines, so it didn't make much sense to have to avoid PARSE according to his measurements. It might still become possible anyway to bypass PARSE, but I'm not sure. |
The separate AGG build is just there until he can get a hold of the host kit and to test ideas. | |
Pekr 18-Feb-2010 [846] | So getting View under the wraps of the command! Extension interface is absolutly essential in order to proceed .... |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [847] | on a low level yes. on VID level, there's more than enough to do. |
Pekr 18-Feb-2010 [848] | Henrik - will you restart your "teaser" screenshot web, as you proceed? :-) |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [849x2] | yes, I can put one up now |
Done... not very exciting to look at. :-) | |
Pekr 18-Feb-2010 [851x2] | ah, the first one :-) |
So you started styling from scratch? Looks a bit different to your initial work, no? | |
Henrik 18-Feb-2010 [853] | no, just 5 minutes of work to get rid of Carl's fancy colors, while we do various GUI testing. |
Graham 19-Feb-2010 [854x2] | that was a prototype color scheme wasn't it? |
Whats the URL to the screenshots? | |
Henrik 19-Feb-2010 [856x2] | yes, prototype color scheme. nothing serious. |
http://rebol.hmkdesign.dk/files/r3/gui/ | |
Graham 19-Feb-2010 [858] | Reactors - page moved This page is being moved to the new R3 document wiki. Where is the new wiki? |
Andreas 19-Feb-2010 [859] | graham: http://www.rebol.com/r3/docs/, i guess |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [860x2] | I guess we need some more public tasks, to keep moving. We're contemplating messaging between faces and I've written something up in the specs document, although I think it's a bit too complex. How does one face communicate with another in a simple way? The trick is to both keep it simple inside the style design and layout specification. Ideas? |
http://rebol.net/wiki/R3_GUI_Specs#Face_attachment | |
GiuseppeC 23-Feb-2010 [862] | Henrik, a question: currently I see a trend to adopt animated background, animated gui elements, animated transitions and sometime 3D ebjects/effects in the interfaces. Do you think they could be possible in the next R3 GUI ? |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [863] | they are partially possible as you can see in the built in demo in R3, but I haven't studied them closely. I don't think we can do this in the beginning, but I think it should be possible to do something similar to Core Animation in MacOSX, where shapes, colors and transparency can automatically transition between two states. I wrote up some quite detailed specs on this a few years ago. |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [864] | Henrik - have you received any docs on GUI from Carl yet? |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [865] | nope |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [866] | Hmm, my question was related to your "face communication" question. IIRC, there was nothing like that in prior R3 GUIs .... I wonder what do we need it for? I went thru your docs, and they look kind of complicated, but maybe those are just detailed and the stuff is really needed, so I don't want to judge it preliminarly ... |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [867x2] | there was actually something in Gabriele's GUI, but it was very complicated to work with. |
it's needed to provide automatic messaging between faces, so you can for example co-relate the data output of a face (scroller) with the y-offset of a panel. This is not very well formalized right now. | |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [869x2] | I stand corrected, the 'attach keyword is there. Actors/reactors are a good idea. |
on-attach, on-detach seems the way to go. But maybe I just don't understand, what do you miss with the current design? | |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [871] | there's not much missing. I'm just asking if anyone knows a way to simplifiy it. |
GiuseppeC 23-Feb-2010 [872] | Thanks henrik, it is obvius those are not meant to be included in the first instance. However I keep in mind the multi-year target: have a modern GUI suitable for all computing platforms. |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [873] | In demo I can currently see, that you can attach e.g. slider to progress bar. It is done in a VID dialect level (reactor?). Then setting the slider value will cause on-attach event to be executed? |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [874] | The way it's done now, it's treated as a bit of a special case: when a scroller occurs, it will try to attach itself onto a face that has a specific actor, on-scroll (I think it is). I don't like this method as it only reveals itself through the style code as a special case. There can be hundreds of other ways to attach styles to eachother, so there needs to be a generic way to do it. |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [875] | ... understood ... |
AdrianS 23-Feb-2010 [876] | is Maxim's Liquid stuff not a good source of inspiration for this kind of thing? |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [877] | it might be |
Pekr 23-Feb-2010 [878] | I think that liquid might be complete engine, which does not make sense to use only some ideas from, but dunno. Max would have to comment ... |
Gregg 23-Feb-2010 [879] | Thanks for bringing this up Henrik. I was going to say the same thing about Max's work. His is a general data flow engine. As usual, I think the first step is to clearly define the goal. If REBOL is about messaging, attaching faces is a very special case. Even limiting the recipient of a message to being a face, you might want more than a direct facet mapping. |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [880x2] | As I see it, you would want to map any facet in face 1 to any facet in face 2. Afterwards, you can judge whether that makes sense or not. This could be by checking for accepted datatypes in the target face at attach-time, but maybe that's too simple? Also facet attachment should happen on as many faces as you need. If you want a slider to control 20 other faces with different facets as input and output, that should be possible. It's starting to look like a flow engine, so maybe we should take a look at what Maxim has done. |
Another issue is that while this should be simple to do in the dialect, it should also be possible to create and destroy connections during runtime and make it abstracted enough to be possible to do with a GUI editor. | |
Gregg 23-Feb-2010 [882] | Yes, we are on the same page. I see this as built upon a messaging infrastructure. It doesn't need to be elaborate today, in what it supports, but the design should allow us to extend and build on it. i.e. we need a message bus that we can tap into, inside an app, interprocess, and distributed. |
Henrik 23-Feb-2010 [883] | What I've noticed about Carl's styles is that he tries to do as much of that intra-face communication inside the styles. That is simple to do at first, but doesn't scale very well, because we will have a lot of different styles. Still, some parts could be inherent to the face or style, in that the face or style holds a list of actions to perform and then some type of evaluator (I've never built these things, so I don't know what to call it). There is DO-STYLE, but a formalization of how to store the actions inside the face is needed, both when specifying face attachments in the layout and when accessing the face attachments using a general access function like DO-STYLE or DO-FACE. The formalization is needed to allow a scalable number of actions or attachments stored in each face. This could simply be a block of blocks or functions that are bound to both source and target face. In order to trigger the action, just DO the block or function and the magic unfolds. |
Pekr 24-Feb-2010 [884] | Whatever we come up with, it should not be too much complex. Elements should be able to register/unregister to particular messages and receive events. The engine should be well isolated. Of course the question is, where does it lead us :-) We will have to wait for Max, to explain us liquid. But - Carl is always right in one aspect - if you can't understand the code in few hours, then it is wrong and noone will be able to understand it. |
Claude 25-Feb-2010 [885] | could you have gui for other os (linux and osx) now ? |
Pekr 25-Feb-2010 [886] | Probably not until it moves to be an Extension and part of the hostkit? |
older newer | first last |