cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Heinicke <>
Subject Woody Rant
Date Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:24:09 GMT
It's maybe to late in the night to start a rant, but I will do it. The 
problem I have with Woody at the moment is, that it becomes more and 
more a client side styling and JavaScript library while it should focus 
on the server side form processing.

Especially the JS stuff is ugly and horrible. If I see things like

result += 


I wonder why you are doing/choosing/accepting such an approach. How 
should this work in future? It might work for many cases at the moment, 
but not all browsers are supported, Safari does even crash on such stuff 
[1]. You will get more and more bug reports in the future about any JS 
not working in a browser or a styling not looking correct like [2]. 
Strict HTML 4 has little problems at the moment, XHTML does not work 
completely! And I do not wonder about this. Might all be little fixable 
bugs, but it's not worth the time IMO.

IMO Woody should re-focus on form processing. Yes, we should provide a 
default view, but a simple one. If there must be used any JS as I see it 
for the calendar or the help popups then it should definitely be done 
the standard way (i.e. W3C DOM) and never using document.write(). We can 
show nice gimmicks, but not "everything that's possible". Who wants to 
maintain the recent code? Is the calendar styleable to get it in 
Corporate Identity? In contradiction to "all browser support" ("works 
with Netscape 4.x, 6.x, IE 5.x ...") new stuff like <label/> and 
<fieldset/> is used, that only works in recent browsers, while for JS 
you want to support NetScape 4.x.

I also don't like "mattkruse-lib". I thought we have no code-ownership? 
Mentioning him like @author is absolutely ok, but not that conspicuous.

I don't know if I forget any detail I wanted also to point out. Maybe I 
can add it in the (hopefully raising) discussion.

Good night,



View raw message