World: r3wp

Pekr: technical possibility? yes. native code? yes. use android api? 
see the link I posted above; SL4A could be a start.

thanks, missed those ones ...

Rebol on mobiles makes sense to provide mobile clients to some commercial 
enterprise apps. Management loves to see the latest real-time sales 
numbers.

yes, I know - but so far, it seems to me, that most platforms are 
going towards more prohibitive way of accessing their APIs, and overall 
running other environments on them. For corporate sphere, Android, 
Win7 and BB are important, not so much iPhone imo, but if you introduce 
that as part of your app solution, some might accept it.

the thing is, how we can get REBOL on such platforms. Compile REBOL 
app into something else or having REBOL in JAVA e.g., sucks imo - 
lot's of work. I can see the only way to be a native port, but then 
- connecting to APIs might be technically difficult.

If the platforms are closed... well, than we leave it behind and 
use the once that are open. And if people use closed platforms, well 
than they have to do without cool solutions.

The only platform that I know of that would prohibit native REBOL 
is Win7 (don't know about BB). However, some platforms (especially 
iPhone) won't allow the full REBOL experience including the GUI. 
Most GUI layouts would need rethinking for the small screen anyways, 
and using native tookkits matters much more on phones (memory, consistency), 
so that's not as big a deal. It does mean that we need to pay more 
attention to embedded profiles of the host kit.

but GUI (VID) is exactly our advantage imo, to show the world, how 
easy is it to do basic form apps. There is not much to adhere toGUI 
wise imo. Each app can look totally different, like in old Amiga 
days, no?

BrianH: interesting note about Win7 .... I did not expect it. The 
licence is more prohibitive than that of an iOS?

Native code is not allowed on WP7 - you must write for Silverlight 
or XBL (both .NET). This isn't a license restriction though, it's 
technological. .NET code becomes native before it is executed though, 
and GNU has a C compiler for .NET, so it's not so bad. WP7 has an 
app store but they have seen the fallout from Apple's restrictions 
so their store is much less restrictive.

The pricniple behind VID - simple dialected GUI layouts - is REBOL's 
strength. The actual implementation would not be as much of a strength 
on a memory-constrained system with a native GUI toolkit and strict 
UI design rules. However, you can make a simple cross-platform layout 
dialect for phone UIs that tells the native toolkit what to do, and 
then make platform-specific implementations for the various native 
toolkits. Dialecting is REBOL's greatest strength.

a lot of VID's dialect can be used to describe the layout even on 
native GUI toolkits.

Exactly! You would need to redo your layout anyways for the small 
screen (unless the layout dialect is *really* properly strict about 
not allowing sizes, offsets and real colors in its layouts, the way 
the R3 GUI is supposed to be), but the layout dialect itself could 
be very compatible and you could reuse a lot of code.

WRT to all the discussions in ~Vent / Rebol3 GUI etc. I want to make 
some points clear. And, don't interpret things that are not written 
 as these will be false.

1. host-kit release: It's still Carl's job and responsebility to 
release official host-kits. We (RM-Asset team) won't do this.


2. host-kit support: Yes, we spend time to work on the host-kit source-code. 
And yes, we concentrate on these things we need for our upcoming 
projects. All this will flow into the host-kit and be available to 
you. And, I'm sponsoring this effort. Our goal is to help to get 
the host-kit to a stable state ASAP.

and it should be also noted, than many here appreciate the effort 
very much, so thanks Robert.

3. rebol3 gui: We are working on getting VID to a state that it can 
be used for app development. For this we did a complete new resizing 
system, changed the styles etc. This is not yet ready for release 
because to much flux in the design and code. We will release it either 
in form of the official VID via Carl or as our own VID fork, if Carl 
decides that the official VID should look differently.

No decision taken yet and I hope that we don't need to fork VID.

4. styles: We need a bunch of styles for our apps. We will create 
them all if necessary because we need a stable style set that is 
enterprise & bullet proof. Most likely I can't make use of hobby-styles 
in commercial apps. There is a bunch of other requirements to full-fill.


And yes, we will release these too. But, we set the priorities, we 
fix the bugs we think are critical, we work on the features we need. 
I listen to you, we think about it, but decisions are made on a pure: 
Urgent & necessary for business context.

5. Extensions: We will create a bunch of R3 extensions we need. Some 
will be quite special, some more generic. For these we use a mix 
from open-source libs, commercial frameworks etc. Which bings up 
the nice licensing issue stuff if things should be released.


As I hate licensing issues at all, and it's a big time killer, my 
rule is quite simple: RM Asset will have all necessary licenses we 
need, if I can release stuff we think about it. If not, than not. 
Sorry. I don't have time to get all this sorted out to provide a 
perfect-R3-framework to everyone.

6. collaboration: We are absolutly open to it. We support the community 
with everything that's possible. But, our main focus will not be 
to become the community runners. We have our own priorities and we 
stick to them. Next, we focus on getting things done.


If the community talks about a specific topic, no problem, if people 
code something, no problem. If we need something different, we will 
do it with or without the community.

7. financing / sponsoring: To be able to do it, one needs to have 
something to spend. And yes, making money form projects is the goal 
for us. This gives the freedom to spend money on non-project relasted 
R3 stuff we do. This is the sponsoring and investment we do into 
R3. As long as I can finance the sponsoring parts I will do it.


Again, I follow the golen rule: The one owning the gold makes the 
rules.


Meaning, I set the priorities to the things we need or which complete 
some aspects etc. But it won't be a community driven process.

All this won't stopp anyone to bite the bullet and do something on 
their own. If you want to avoid double work, cross-check with us. 
We will tell everyone what we are working on. I will tell everyone 
what our plans are. etc. As transparent as possible.

Again, we will move forward. You can "follow" us and use what we 
have done. You can "accompany" us to help driving things forward 
faster. At the end of the day it's your decision (of course).

But I won't enter any Kindergarten discussions that are not moving 
us forward or where some go nuts because we have clear red thread 
we follow and don't care to much what they think.

That's it. Overall, IMO we have moved R3 forward much faster and 
with greater progress than before. And it's not only because we are 
now coding everything etc. By far not. But at least we have helped 
to get more momentum to R3.

android is linux based ... i have one on my acer laptop that's a 
short linux ...

on acer the android don't have access to android market ...

instead of having an android phone maybe the devtools include an 
emulator no ?

Thanks Robert. I like the fact that a goal is the use of R3 to build 
commercial apps. That means things like accelerator keys and other 
features have a better chance of being seen as important.

http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0329.html- about callbacks

cool... will be there any examples as well?

(OT: Our world is back online)

Carl, great news! I'm ready :-)

I have a XML file and want to handle it by tags like a nested block. 
Are there are any tricks? Or do I need to use PARSE / FIND etc.

So, you want to use path notation on the parse XML?

parsed XML

I would like to extract a set of elements like: Everything between 
<TAG> ... </TAG>

TAG should be specified.

What I mean is, do you want to convert the XML to a block and then 
access it like this?

  data/tag

Or do you just want to parse the raw data out of the XML between 
those two <tags>?

No, not necessary.

Yes, just raw data.

Just use PARSE then. I have a solution for the block approach, but 
just use PARSE when I need to extract data in more stream-oriented 
ways.

Give me a minute though, I might have something...

This was used with small pieces of XML, rather than entire documents, 
but might be a starting point for you.


xml-get-field: func [input name /local xml-field= data other-name] 
[
	xml-field=: compose/deep [ 
		some [

   (rejoin ["<" name ">"]) copy data to (rejoin ["</" name ">"]) to 
   end
			| skip ;(to paren! [prin '.])
		]
	]
	either parse input xml-field= [data] [none]
]

Ok, thanks.

I've used Gavin's XML-object.r in a couple of projects. Not tried 
it under R3 though:
   http://www.rebol.org/view-script.r?script=xml-object.r

http://www.rebol.it/power-mezz/parsers/ml-parser.html

inside?: no
parse-ml "...your text..." func [command data] [
    either inside? [
        ?? command ?? data
        if command = </tag> [inside?: no]
    ] [
        if command =  <tag> [inside?: yes]
    ]
]

; Another flavour of Rebol XML:
do http://www.ross-gill.com/r/r3xml.r
doc: load-xml/dom location
foreach tag doc/get-by-tag <a> [
	probe tag/flatten
	probe tag/text
	probe tag/get #href
]