ssastre at seaswork.com
Wed Oct 31 17:43:57 UTC 2007
I'm also hapier when I can custom and scale with my own code Keith. That's
why I've asked. If we *have* to spend time and effort to achieve interfaces
like those why don't spend it where we know has simplicity and
I know and use ShoreComponents for some basic stuff. It's OK but is not
great. So with all due respect for who made it is not comparable to a half
of the experience that ExtJS interfaces can give.
So my point is that we can make interfaces comparable to ExtJS but from
Smalltalk. Take any of those gorgeous lists and try to make something
different on how they show things. Like putting different presenters
depending on the model of the item in the list so showing completely
heterogeneous things. End of ExtJS party. But if that was made in
Smalltalk.. it's another story because the show continues.
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] En nombre
> de Keith Hodges
> Enviado el: Miércoles, 31 de Octubre de 2007 13:06
> Para: Seaside - general discussion
> Asunto: Re: [Seaside] YUI
> > Why we can't have our own (community) hierarchy of gorgeous
> widgets on
> > top of smalltalk-seaside-prototype-scriptaculous?
> > cheers,
> > Sebastian
> There is no reason why we cannot. I must admit that I am
> happier with stuff that I can manage in my Smalltalk IDE.
> Currently we have ShoreComponents, but up until now these
> components have always needed some integration work (no
> matter how small) in order to add them to your application.
> Thats where the ShoreHelper comes in...
> We could hijack the OMeta code that allows you to write
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the seaside