Re: [Perl-widget-developer] Team-building question of the day

[Issac G. <ne...@wr...>]

> Issac,
>
> There are two statements here.
> It seems you object to the second.
> What about the first statement? Do you agree that that is what we are
> building?

At the offset - absolutely.  Although I think we're building a generic
system, I agree that our first order is designing this to work in an HTML
environment.

> With regard to your response to the second statement...
> Do you *really* care about any of those other environments?
> Do you build X applications? Curses application?

Actually, no I don't - but that doesn't mean that I don't realize that other
potential _users_ do - remember, as with any kind of product, your wants are
only secondary - it's the thoughts of the users (be them developers using
tools, or end-users using software) that count the most...  I'm not saying
that we have to build these modules right now (or even EVER).  What I am
saying is that I believe that we are able to - and therefore, as programmers
developing a good "development tool" should - build the options for future
interoperability into the system as much as we can.

> I build web applications.
> But I hate the request/response model of programming.

We have a request/response environment too: HTTP

> The reason I care about the other technical environments is that I believe
> that considering them will help my efforts at abstraction.  Programming
> widgets in X is on an event-driven programming model, and I want that same
> programming model for the web.

OK - So I'll agree that it mght take considerable abstraction and thought
into figuring out how to converge the different schemes that we'd LIKE to
support future interoperability with into a single abstract set of base
classes.

So it'll mean a bit of extra thinking and arguaing about future
implementations on this list now - so?  We can deal with it, I think.  And
better now, while we're in a good position to work it out, than later when
implementing changes like this will cause major compatibility problems...

  Issac


> Stephen
>
>
> At 09:36 PM 6/4/2001 +0200, Issac Goldstand wrote:
> >Nope.  I'd say we're making a GENERIC set of controls - we just happen to
be
> >focusing on HTML for our first step - but we shouldn't do things the
"easy"
> >way (if/when it's all that HTML requires) just because we happen to be
> >focusing on HTML just now - we should put in significant effort to leave
it
> >open.
> >
> >  Issac
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Stephen Adkins" <ste...@of...>
> >To: <per...@li...>
> >Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 06:36
> >Subject: [Perl-widget-developer] Team-building question of the day
> >
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I would appreciate a high response rate on this question from members
> >> of the list who expect to contribute any opinions or code in the coming
> >> month. (i.e. *not* silent list members)
> >>
> >>  * Do you agree with the following two statements?
> >>
> >> 1. Perl Widget Library is a library of useful HTML user interface
widgets,
> >> and a framework for extending them and developing your own.
> >>
> >> 2. The library is designed conceptually to support non-HTML widgets
too,
> >> such as WML, Gtk/X, Curses, but we'll only get to those if it doesn't
> >> compromise our ability to make HTML widgets.
> >>
> >> Stephen
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Perl-widget-developer mailing list
> >> Per...@li...
> >> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perl-widget-developer
> >>
> >
> >
>