cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Refactoring woody styling (was Re: Woody Rant)
Date Sun, 23 Nov 2003 16:52:08 GMT

On 22 Nov 2003, at 18:30, Ugo Cei wrote:

> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>> I don't agree with you here: you cannot seriously convince people to 
>> use Woody if it doesn't provide the minimal "fancy features" that 
>> every other form framework provides. You won't convince anybody with 
>> flat inputs. We need tooltips, help popups, calendars, etc. But I 
>> also think the current field-styling.xsl has reached a size where it 
>> must be split into smaller units that everybody can assemble 
>> depending on their needs (see below).
>
> I'm with you here. Let's face it, what people are and will be using 
> Woody for is mainly HTML forms, and there's no way you can make a 
> decent form-based application without *lots* of DHTML code. For 
> example, in my current project we have forms with hundreds of fields, 
> and having tabs is a huge usability improvement. So much that for an 
> early prototype we developed our own "tabs" script on top of JXForms, 
> but as soon as I saw Woody's tabs I threw the prototype away and 
> restarted from scratch.
>
> If there are problems with the current implementation, let's fix them 
> and provide a standards-compliant DHTML-based toolkit for those who 
> need it (like me ;-) ). If we want to create the best web application 
> development platform in the world, we cannot provide only a 
> server-side solution and tell people to do their homework on the 
> client side. This isn't going to sell.
>
> Let's not just provide something for the lowest common denominator 
> (a.k.a. Netscape 4.X). We could do a simple stylesheet for people who 
> just want a plain registration form for their guestbook, but I'd 
> question the appropriateness of using Woody for that, the 
> FormValidatorAction would work much better.

I agree here. It is better to keep the common denominator much higher 
than netscape 4.x, I would say IE 5.0 and NS 6 would target 95% of the 
browser market. For the rest, well, up to them: if you need it, you fix 
it.

As for Safari, by the time we are done, I'm sure they'll fix the 
issues, they are fixing bugs at an incredible rate.

At the same time, all the style should happen in the XSLT thus the 
<HTML> calendar strings worries me.

--
Stefano.

Mime
View raw message