cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From hepabolu <hepab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release 2.1.9 (again) [Dojo]
Date Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:53:43 GMT
Sylvain Wallez said the following on 13-03-2006 11:32:
> hepabolu wrote:
>> Sylvain Wallez said the following on 13-03-2006 10:47:
>>> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>> Anyways, given my current time constraints I can do the release not any
>>>> sooner than the 31st of March - so, seeing this as a positive fact, we
>>>> have a little more time to test everything :). I would call for a code
>>>> freeze on the 24th of March then.
>>>>   
>>> +1. Dojo code is committed, and I'd like people to try the new forms
>>> samples.
>> Great! Thanks!
>>
>> Haven't looked thoroughly at the code yet, but I'm wondering two things:
>>
>> 1. several special attributes (ajax=true and some Dojo required
>> attributes) make it impossible to produce valid XHTML pages. A quick
>> reading in some Dojo files showed that most dojo attributes can be
>> replaced with classnames or identifiers, making valid XHTML pages
>> still possible. Have you used any of those? Or are there other ways to
>> produce valid XHTML pages that can already be incorporated in the
>> current code?
> 
> The ajax="true" attribute is used server-side by Cocoon and can be
> filtered out by the stylesheets.

Ah, that's nice. It's currently not filtered, i.e. present in the 
resulting code. Maybe something to add to the stylesheets before the 
release?

> The dojoType attribute triggers the Dojo widget system. It can be
> written in 3 different ways depending on the context/requirements:
> - dojoType attribute (e.g. dojoType="CFormsRepeater") -- works everywhere
> - namespaced dojo:type attribute (e.g. dojo:type="CFormsRepeater") --
> works on namespace-aware browsers
> - CSS class (e.g. class="dojo-CFormsRepeater")
> 
> I used the dojoType attribute variant, now we may decide to use another one.

I have not enough knowledge of the various browsers, so I cannot figure 
out whether a namespaced dojo:type attribute is feasible to work with 
(a.o. which browsers do and don't support it).
OTOH web designers in general (dealing mainly with CSS, graphics and 
layout) prefer valid XHTML + valid CSS before they are able to tackle 
the browser-inconsistencies in CSS. We might as well try to accommodate 
that (i.e. produce a valid XHTML page) by making sure that no 
transformation step introduces any (X)HTML errors nor warnings.

In short: when the final page is not valid (X)HTML, this is due to 
errors made by the builder of the pipeline.

> However, some widgets _require_ foreign attributes to be present. These
> are the widget-specific properties.

Nasty.

Having chatted with some members of the Dojo community gave the 
impression that they don't care about valid (X)HTML as long as the 
javascript works.
So there is a conflicting point of view.

>> 2. Dojo contains a (rich text) editor, much along the lines of
>> htmlarea. Have you compared the two and would it be possible to
>> replace htmlarea with the Dojo version or are there features we would
>> miss? In the latter case: if we stick with htmlarea, is it worthwhile
>> to update to Xinha since that is a more active project around htmlarea?
> 
> I haven't investigated in this area...

Do you think it's worth the effort?

Bye, Helma

Mime
View raw message