I'm not a UI specialist, but I do like Topcoat Lucas Holmquist wrote: > Starting a new thread for this: > > >> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >> >> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >> >> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or why the >> preference. >> >> Ready, Go. > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- abstractj _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Topcoat is a nice and clean CSS framework. Bootstrap is a messy framework dirtied by some half-assed JS based widgets that don't work well in most cases. The few widgets we may need could probably be done with pure CSS, or a small jQuery plugin. No need for the bootstrap mess. Also, every site using bootstrap, for the most part, still looks like bootstrap and that's annoying. On Jul 8, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; wrote: > I'm not a UI specialist, but I do like Topcoat > > Lucas Holmquist wrote: >> Starting a new thread for this: >> >> >>> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >>> >>> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >>> >>> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or why the >>> preference. >>> >>> Ready, Go. >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > -- > abstractj > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

If Luke/Kris want to use Topcoat for a good number of reasons, I am +9001 on that. On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com <mailto:kris@redhat.com>> wrote: Topcoat is a nice and clean CSS framework. Bootstrap is a messy framework dirtied by some half-assed JS based widgets that don't work well in most cases. The few widgets we may need could probably be done with pure CSS, or a small jQuery plugin. No need for the bootstrap mess. Also, every site using bootstrap, for the most part, still looks like bootstrap and that's annoying. On Jul 8, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org <mailto:bruno@abstractj.org>> wrote: > I'm not a UI specialist, but I do like Topcoat > > Lucas Holmquist wrote: >> Starting a new thread for this: >> >> >>> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >>> >>> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >>> >>> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or why the >>> preference. >>> >>> Ready, Go. >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > -- > abstractj > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Jul 9, 2013, at 8:42 AM, Hylke Bons <hbons(a)redhat.com <mailto:hbons@redhat.com>> wrote: > Hi, > > I can't judge the implementation or performance. I'll take people's > word on that, though I don't think it's the most important thing. On mobile, performance is one of the most important things both in terms of perceived performance from the user (i.e. does this app "feel" fast and react to my interaction appropriately) and actual performance (i.e. draining the battery). That will be more important than having a fancy menu or a date picker any day.

> > The default style will be overridden with our own, no matter what > framework we'll be using. So style is irrelevant here really. I agree > that people should stop using the Bootstrap style everywhere, it > looks lame (but the same can be said for Topcoat once it gets adopted > more). > > I've downloaded Topcoat and had a look inside. I don't see any > components, just a few simple element stylings. What components do we (AeroGear) "need" that we can't just use a little plugin for or roll our own? I feel like a base of some nicely styled native components is perfect, not to mention much leaner.

> If that all Topcoat is, it probably makes more sense to do all the > CSS custom, as it will be almost as much work as retheming everything > and there's not really a point having a CSS framework at all then. This makes no sense to me. Topcoat has a complete, and easy to use theming system based on Stylus and built with Grunt. You change a few variables for colors, font sizes, etc., then add some of your own custom styles on top to make it your own. > We can grab our missing components from Bootstrap (or something > else), and make some components from scratch where the Bootstrap > components are suboptimal. > > So the style elements being equal, I think Bootstrap would give us a > head start due to a better selection of components that we need. So I > want to vouch for that one. I think a selection of components is one of the least important items on the list in terms of what AeroGear needs as a project. > > Thanks, > > Hylke > > > > On 08/07/2013 21:55, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> If Luke/Kris want to use Topcoat for a good number of reasons, I am >> +9001 on that. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com >> <mailto:kris@redhat.com>> wrote: >> >> Topcoat is a nice and clean CSS framework. >> >> Bootstrap is a messy framework dirtied by some half-assed JS >> based widgets that don't work well in most cases. >> >> The few widgets we may need could probably be done with pure >> CSS, or a small jQuery plugin. No need for the bootstrap mess. >> Also, every site using bootstrap, for the most part, still looks >> like bootstrap and that's annoying. >> >> On Jul 8, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org >> <mailto:bruno@abstractj.org>> wrote: >> >> > I'm not a UI specialist, but I do like Topcoat >> > >> > Lucas Holmquist wrote: >> >> Starting a new thread for this: >> >> >> >> >> >>> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >> >>> >> >>> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >> >>> >> >>> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or >> why the >> >>> preference. >> >>> >> >>> Ready, Go. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > >> > -- >> > abstractj >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aerogear-dev mailing list >> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Jul 9, 2013, at 8:42 AM, Hylke Bons <hbons(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi, > > I can't judge the implementation or performance. I'll take people's word on that, though I don't think it's the most important thing. On mobile, performance is one of the most important things both in terms of perceived performance from the user (i.e. does this app "feel" fast and react to my interaction appropriately) and actual performance (i.e. draining the battery). That will be more important than having a fancy menu or a date picker any day. > > The default style will be overridden with our own, no matter what framework we'll be using. So style is irrelevant here really. I agree that people should stop using the Bootstrap style everywhere, it looks lame (but the same can be said for Topcoat once it gets adopted more). > > I've downloaded Topcoat and had a look inside. I don't see any components, just a few simple element stylings. What components do we (AeroGear) "need" that we can't just use a little plugin for or roll our own? I feel like a base of some nicely styled native components is perfect, not to mention much leaner. > If that all Topcoat is, it probably makes more sense to do all the CSS custom, as it will be almost as much work as retheming everything and there's not really a point having a CSS framework at all then. This makes no sense to me. Topcoat has a complete, and easy to use theming system based on Stylus and built with Grunt. You change a few variables for colors, font sizes, etc., then add some of your own custom styles on top to make it your own. > We can grab our missing components from Bootstrap (or something else), and make some components from scratch where the Bootstrap components are suboptimal. > > So the style elements being equal, I think Bootstrap would give us a head start due to a better selection of components that we need. So I want to vouch for that one. I think a selection of components is one of the least important items on the list in terms of what AeroGear needs as a project. > > Thanks, > > Hylke > > > > On 08/07/2013 21:55, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> If Luke/Kris want to use Topcoat for a good number of reasons, I am +9001 on that. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> Topcoat is a nice and clean CSS framework. >> >> Bootstrap is a messy framework dirtied by some half-assed JS based widgets that don't work well in most cases. >> >> The few widgets we may need could probably be done with pure CSS, or a small jQuery plugin. No need for the bootstrap mess. Also, every site using bootstrap, for the most part, still looks like bootstrap and that's annoying. >> >> On Jul 8, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; wrote: >> >> > I'm not a UI specialist, but I do like Topcoat >> > >> > Lucas Holmquist wrote: >> >> Starting a new thread for this: >> >> >> >> >> >>> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >> >>> >> >>> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >> >>> >> >>> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or why the >> >>> preference. >> >>> >> >>> Ready, Go. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > >> > -- >> > abstractj >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > aerogear-dev mailing list >> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

I was investigating CSS "frameworks" (or rather widget libraries) recently and Bootstrap isn't really good choice for fast, mobile-optimized applications. *Bootstrap* serves its purpose when it comes to mobile-ready, responsive pages, but it does poor job when someone wants to build fast mobile application. Bootstrap's poor performance is also very perceivable in hybrid development - I tried a sample app in Cordova and it's quite slow /wrt rendering and transitions (btw, I have tried Kris' devnexus AngularJS/AeroGear app [1] there as well ;-). I have tried *Topcoat* personally and it is really fast, though it's incomplete yet (0.5 was released a week ago, which contains barely half of the "widgets" that jQuery mobile could provide). However I really like where *Topcoat* is directed. There is a sample application [2, 3] which integrates Topcoat with Backbone and it's impressively fast in Chrome on Android. I have tried it in Cordova and it's also fast there. (however Cordova suffers from integration with out-dated WebKit (the one from built-in Android browser) thus there are some issues with rendering). (People are also reporting that current *jQuery Mobile* is too slow for web/hybrid development if you expect the app to be as fast as native.) Btw the best mobile widget library I have seen so far /wrt performance and completeness is *Ratchet* [4] (though it has Apple-ish look&feel). It works really smooth in Cordova - there is an AngularJS sample app [5]). ~ Lukas [1] https://github.com/kborchers/aerogear-devnexus [2] http://coenraets.org/apps/directory/backbone/topcoat/ [3] http://coenraets.org/blog/2013/06/sample-mobile-phonegap-application-with... [4] http://maker.github.io/ratchet/ [5] https://github.com/raveenb/phonegap-angular-ratchet -- Lukas Fryc Software Engineer JBoss by Red Hat https://twitter.com/lfryc On 07/08/2013 09:20 PM, Lucas Holmquist wrote: > Starting a new thread for this: > > >> I would like to reboot the discussion of css frameworks >> >> the 2 that are in question are bootstrap and topcoat. >> >> i would like to here why one is "better" than the other. or why the >> preference. >> >> Ready, Go. > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev