forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <thors...@apache.org>
Subject CSS in view/viewHelper (was Re: using view/viewHelper)
Date Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:10:22 GMT
I opened up a new thread to respecify the focus.

*Point 1 - css linking*
On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 14:54 -0700, Diwaker Gupta wrote: 
> After some playing around, I seriously think the CSS should be
> *completely* decoupled from the nugget contracts. The problem with the
> current implementation is that it includes all the default CSS files
> (eg: basic.css, contracts-<pagename>.css and so on) and then it loads
> the CSS file specified by forrest:css

Yes, I reckon I understood the problem. 

> Due to the way CSS works, if I have to define new properties for
> the nav-bar say, then I first have to UNDO all of the changes made by
> the CSS files loaded by default, and then define the CSS properties
> the way I want them to.
> ...
> A simple option that controls inclusion of default CSS
> files should fix the problem.

I see 2 options here: 
1) We *do not* provide a css implementation for a specific contract nor the basic.css
but provide a css stylesheet for all possible contracts (e.g. default.css) and basic elements.

2) We keep the current implementation.

1) will save compilation time. 2) gives css controll to the contract authors.
What are our preferences on that?

Either way, the default.css (1.) or all from (2.) *have to* be defined in the default.fv 
as e.g. <forrest:css url="default.css"/>.

If no CSS is defined in the view then *no* css will be linked in the presentation. 

That will drop the need to UNDO the properties of the CSS files and open a 
more efficient way to provide a custom css implementation for the contracts 
("simple option that controls inclusion of default CSS").


*Point 2 - css theming*
On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 12:21 -0700, Diwaker Gupta wrote: 
> Awesome! While we're at it, I wonder why we have those elaborate color
> definitions in skinconf.xml? Since we are going to use CSS for
> skinning anyways, doesn't it make more sense to put the color
> definitions into CSS as well? Just a thought.

http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/docs/TR/2004/WD-forrest10.html

Have a look at this document and search for "theming":
"The view is creating the html-skelleton that is used for theming. 
Themes are view dependent but e.g. you can write one theme for x view derivatives. 
Theming adds colors and general appearance info. In html it's css files for example, 
or the skinconf color information."

The idea (having point 1 in mind) should be to have 2 layers for the theming. 
One adds the general appearance (default.css) the other enables color information (default.color.css).

That makes it possible to have a theme and change the colors of it without 
touching the css via the skinconf color. Actually the theming via skinconf colors 
is not implemented in view/viewHelper yet.

WDYT?

salu2
-- 
thorsten

"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)


Mime
View raw message