On 27/02/13 04:34 AM, Julien Viet wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> your feedback is important.
>
> can nail down your vision and experience on what responsive design should be in
GateIn layout (i.e from this point of view and not from the layout editing point of view)
in a document ?
Sorry, I meant to do this sooner. Where would be the best place to document this?
Thanks,
Matt Wringe
> thanks
>
> Julien
>
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 7:56 PM, Julien Viet <julien(a)julienviet.com> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 7:22 PM, Matt Wringe <mwringe(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue 26 Feb 2013 11:14:36 AM EST, Julien Viet wrote:
>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 4:43 PM, Matt Wringe <mwringe(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My biggest concern with this and in place editing is that its meant
for people who don't know how to use css/html/js and just want a drag and drop
solution. This makes it simple for them to do very simple layouts, but it becomes
impossible to do anything outside of what we have decided is a "good layout
approach". And if we want to add in new features later (like responsive layouts) it
becomes more and more complex to it in a simple drag and drop application.
>>>>>
>>>> The "edit in place" is a front end for the underlying solution.
It should not exclude what you are saying and I think that's what you propose to do
below (advanced mode). This "duality" is a must have.
>>>>
>>>>> If a web designer can't jump in and make changes using the
technology they already know (html/css/js), then there is a problem. I assume that most
customers are probably going to have web designers anyways, since they will probably have
at least one custom portlet/gadget.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I would really like to see is an 'advance mode' where I
can specify the html, css and javascript for a particular container (note: not inline css
like we currently do with the limited width/height approach, but add css and javascript to
the page if containerXYZ is loaded. Like what currently happens with portlets). If I want
to use media queries, or float one container inside another, there should be a way that I
can do that easily by accessing and modifying the source.
>>>>>
>>>>> The advance mode should be the preferred way to handle anything more
complex than a simple static row/column layout. I don't think we should handle
responsive design in the drag and drop application, only through the advance mode.
>>>> We can handle responsive design in the drag and drop application by
specifying how some items should behave with "responsive utility classes" (see
there in bootstrap :
http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/scaffolding.html#responsive).
>>> Responsive utility classes in twitter bootstrap are used to specify if
something should be displayed on a particular 'device' or not. This really has
nothing to do with responsive design and is extremely limited in what it can do.
>> I think today the use case about responsive design configuration are not well
known because we have a lack of feedback from customers: from RedHat customers AND from
eXo customers (those customers don't have the same needs as we know). eXo customers
usually needs a simple and powerful visual experience, Red Hat customers prefers to edit
XML (joking).
>>
>> There is likely work to do in the responsive part, the "Edit In Place"
specification was not written initially with that in mind. I will check with Benjamin
Paillereau (perhaps he's reading that list too) on this item for the "Edit In
Place" spec. I know he did some experiment recently with responsive design
(
http://blog.exoplatform.com/2013/01/24/juzu-day-3-the-coolness).
>>
>>>>> My other hope with a new layout approach is that we get rid of all
the complexities in the html for the containers. Each container should ideally be just one
div. Someone looking at the source for the page should see nice clean html code.
>>>> The new approach does not use anymore concept of nested containers but
instead flat regions (pretty much like in JBoss Portal 2.x). The portal is responsible for
translating those regions into a serie of div with the correct styles for performing the
layout.
>>>>
>>>>> Is it possible to remove the shared layout and move everything there
to the site layout?
>>>> There is a definitive need for shared layout.
>>> Why is there a definitive need for shared layout? I don't get why we need
it when we could just add it to the site layout by default when a new site is created.
>> in early version of GateIn 3.x , the shared design was handled like you are
suggesting and it was creating several issues:
>>
>> 1/ during site layout edition the toolbar was displayed (because it was part of
layout):
>> - it creates a confusing UI experience
>> - it creates visual UI bugs
>>
>> 2/ usually the shared layout contains "meta user interface", i.e the
toolbar which itself allows to enter or exit edit mode, perform login / logout, etc… it is
obvious that this part should not be edited
>>
>> when we moved to shared layout, all those issues magically vanished.
>>
>>>>> I think that individual sites should be able to specify what they
want instead of having to share it between all sites. Or at least give a site an option to
disable the shared layout if they so wish.
>>>> That's a good option to what you said above.
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon 25 Feb 2013 06:39:06 PM EST, Julien Viet wrote:
>>>>>> I dropped some ideas for the layout technical specification in
this document:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y9CtdMytJ5VVUzSmhooJXJxTPy0SpXlfqAn9P...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This document aims to define the technical part in relationship
with the "In Place Editing" spec :
https://community.jboss.org/wiki/InPlaceEditing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wanted at least to drop the relationship between grid system
(and more abstract typographic grid) and the nested layouts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please forgive the usage of gdocs but for now it's here as it
is a WIP, later it will go in wiki as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The doc is open for comments and the gatein-dev list is a good
place to discuss this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 23, 2013, at 5:23 PM, Nick Scavelli
<nscavell(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Julien, awesome work so far. Looking forward to 4.x
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 01/23/2013 11:05 AM, Julien Viet wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I think it is important to explain I blogged about it
there:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
http://www.dzone.com/links/gatein_40_development.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jan 23, 2013, at 12:07 AM, Julien Viet
<julien(a)julienviet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> actually 5: reimplement the NG service
**persistence** using the in memory store and validate it with the tests decoupled from
Step 3.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> persistence are quite low level and easy to
implement, for instance:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
https://github.com/gatein/gatein-portal/blob/4.0.0/component/portal/src/m...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and also I repackaged the NG services to
org.gatein.portal.mop
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 23, 2013, at 12:03 AM, Julien Viet
<julien(a)julienviet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> here is a status update with a milestone reached.
The ram persistence and the data import are working which is a good news, let me explain
the details here:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The goal is to get rid of DataStorage interface
for many reasons. A few services have been developed for 3 years with goal to supplement
it one day: NavigationService, DescriptionService and PageService . They have all been
developed to fix a particular issue with DataStorage (performance or scalability). So a
few things were still managed by the DataStorage : sites and layouts.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step1: extraction of the framework used in the
NavigationService that is very powerful for managing hierarchy synchronization (i.e
load/update/rebase/save) and make it generic enough for reuse. Added a couple of missing
features on it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step2: new services have been created to replace
to finish this replacement : SiteService for managing sites (similar to PageService) and
LayoutService that takes care of loading the layout of a page or a site. (consider a
layout as an attachment of a navigation node or a page). Those services have been
implemented with existing MOP and the goal was to make nearly all existing module pass.
Only tests for dashboard do not pass because the dashboard impl is a hack that should not
survive a long time (but persistence is very fine). The SiteService is quite trivial
(pretty much like PageService). The LayoutService was also trivial because of the reuse of
the Step 1 (which is a **big** win).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step3: all the NG services have been decoupled
from MOP introducing an abstraction layer (SitePersistence for SiteService,
PagePersistence for PageService, etc…). At this point the NG services tests are decoupled
too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step4: code an in memory store for ram storage .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step5: reimplement the NG services using the in
memory store and validate it with the tests decoupled from Step 3.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step6: now there is still some work on the import
of data. It must be decoupled from the UserPortalConfigService because it is legacy and
nearly fix it. The import code was decoupled from the NewPortalConfigListener (a component
plugin of UserPortalConfigService). Then a new class wrapping this has been created for
importing data.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Step7: update the web portal created 2 weeks ago
to boot it (with Arquillian of course)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So the good news is that it works fine and is
reliable enough for continuing the web portal development.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The boot is fast enough for providing
productivity, running a single test takes 5 seconds on my laptop:
>>>>>>>>>> 1/ web server boot
>>>>>>>>>> 2/ data import
>>>>>>>>>> 3/ juzu boot
>>>>>>>>>> 4/ invoke a controller with selenium
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the fun here is a snapshot of the content of
the ram store I made for checking the entire content was loaded :
https://gist.github.com/4599534
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Julien
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Bolesław Dawidowicz
<boleslaw.dawidowicz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed 16 Jan 2013 02:07:31 PM CET, Julien
Viet wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking about renaming the
services those services to use the org.gatein package:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> NavigationService, PageService,
DescriptionService and the new LayoutService and SiteService
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Julien Viet
<julien(a)julienviet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is not possible because the data
model is simplified according to the InPlaceEditing spec
(
https://community.jboss.org/wiki/InPlaceEditing)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:35 AM, Thomas
Heute <theute(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the update !
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does some of that work could be
incorporated into incremental 3.x releases ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/15/2013 04:24 PM, Julien
Viet wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here is a short update.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Focusing on the services for
data that are all JCR based, which is an issue for testing the portal rewrite, so for now
focusing on improving this part. The goal is to have in memory implementation of the
services for testing purposes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment I'm working
on the rewrite of the remaining legacy service DataStorage. This service has a strong
coupling to JCR, the new services introduced (NavigationService, PageService, etc…) are
coupled but not that much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I started the LayoutService
that focus on the layout aspect of a UI structure and extracted code from
NavigationService for reusing in NavigationService. The DataStorage now uses it for
loading and saving pages. This is a good step forward.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm keeping the
DataStorage at the moment for two reasons:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - we want to continue to use
the normal gatein with webui for a little while
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the data storage is heavily
tested so the testing of the underlying services through data storage is a good thing to
have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The next step is to write a
SiteService that load and save sites without their template. When it is done, the
DataStorage loading/saving PortalConfig will combine the SiteService and the LayoutService
for loading configs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Julien
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 7, 2013, at 3:51 PM,
Julien Viet <julien(a)julienviet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to let you know that
I'm starting 4.0.0 in my github repository :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Initial plan is to come
with a basic implementation rapidly (1 month?) and then make it formal with a spec when it
becomes complex but for now:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - get away from UI
component oriented programming and uses simple MVC programming
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - rely Juzu for the web
application framework
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - uses javax.inject for
IOC controllers and bridge with the kernel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - uses Arquillian for
developing with testing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - reuses existing
services (i.e stuff in components/*)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For now dev is there
https://github.com/vietj/gatein-portal/tree/4.0.0 but it can be moved to the gatein
organization any time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current stuff of
course is quite empty but I hope it will become quickly something, but there is Juzu and
Arquillian which are very productive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want to help,
it's open for business!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Julien
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because
you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JBoss / eXo" group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email
to jbossexo(a)googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group,
send email to jbossexo+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit this
group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jbossexo?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> gatein-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> gatein-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> gatein-dev mailing list
>>>>>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gatein-dev mailing list
>> gatein-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/gatein-dev