Hi fellas!

"Andreas Raab" <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Russel,
> 
> >   I think you have hit the nail on the head.
> 
> Thanks ;-)

Yes, I agree too. 

> > UIManager sounds like a good place to start.
> 
> Right. Get it here: http://source.impara.de/Tweak.html (UIManager-ar.3.mcz 
> is the latest).
> 
> > As for the cross-framework widgets what about making an abstraction of
> > widgets stored in something such as XML which can generate a framework
> > specific version of a widget or window? Note that is just a place to get
> > started, No Thought(tm) has been put into it. :)
> 
> Yes, I proposed that earlier on IRC. The Squeak World Tour had some baseline 
> code to deal with that - XML ui spec and then an appropriate builder for the 
> different backends. I wonder if that code is still around (and if so, what 

A good article :) on it written many, many eons ago:

	http://anakin.bluefish.se:8000/sqworld

> license it might be under). That said, there isn't an intrinsic need for 

Squeak-L I think: http://anakin.bluefish.se:8000/sqworld/3

> using XML - anything that doesn't refer to class names directly could be 
> used; say something that just reads as:
> 
>     builder := UIBuilder default.
>     list := builder newPluggableList on: self getListSelector: ...
> 
> will work just as well and might be less effort (yes you would have to fix 
> up the interfaces to be consistent but that's certainly doable).
> 
> > And **MOST** importantly to *me*, this fits into the idea of a minimal 
> > Base
> > Squeak which can have packages loaded into it as required. If I run a
> > headless image, I load the Headless package (HeadlessUIManager). Morphic
> > image? Load Morphic package (MorphicUIManager). Tweak? ... etc.
> 
> As you might imagine I don't care too much about running headless - what 
> would be more interesting (and an immense coolness factor) is if a 
> SeasideUIManager would be capable of rendering a standard Squeak browser. Or 
> Monticello. Or anything else ;-)

The tricky part with all this might be to find someone with the "itch".
I mean, most frameworks have someone holding the torch, like you for
Tweak or Ned (kinda) for Morphic. But who would hold the torch for the
abstract layer on top?

As most often is the case not much will be done if noone has that itch.
Btw, if we are going for an XML description (or hey, why limit us to ONE
way of expressing UIs) we could simply try to use the same that say
Glade uses. Or the one wx uses. Or at least look at them so that we can
interoperate.

> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

regards, Göran