Microsoft NAV look and feel

[Ean Schuessler]

I really like what Microsoft NAV is doing in their interfaces. If we do something like this using GWT it would be suh-lick!

http://www.microsoft.com/library/media/1033/business/images/dynamics/screenshotimages/PivotTable.jpg 

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
[hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315

[rajsaini]

Hi Ean,

This is very much possible using Eclipse RAP. I did basic level of
integration (Wrote a view handler for RAP). You can see some of the
demos here:

http://www.eclipse.org/rap/demos.php

Thanks,

Raj

Ean Schuessler wrote:
> I really like what Microsoft NAV is doing in their interfaces. If we do something like this using GWT it would be suh-lick!
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/library/media/1033/business/images/dynamics/screenshotimages/PivotTable.jpg 
>
>  

[Adrian Crum-2]

It's a good thing we have themes - someone with enough time on their hands could develop a theme that looks like that. ;-)

Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look at it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated and sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the desired effects.

At around the same time, there was an effort in the project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen Garden like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and that's what you see in the project today. I'm still in favor of that approach.

Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to having small changes made to the markup to make styling a little easier. For example, we could have the menu widgets output <div> elements inside the <li> elements to make it easier to style menu item backgrounds.

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Microsoft NAV look and feel
> To: "OFBiz Dev List" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: "erik" <[hidden email]>
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 10:53 AM
> I really like what Microsoft NAV is doing in their
> interfaces. If we do something like this using GWT it would
> be suh-lick!
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/library/media/1033/business/images/dynamics/screenshotimages/PivotTable.jpg
>
>
> --
> Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
> [hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700
> x 315

     

[Adam Heath-2]

Adrian Crum wrote:
> Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look at
> it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated and
> sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the desired
> effects.

I've got gwt startup code that scans the page document for
class="Foo", and converts them to GWT widgets on the fly.  But since
it has to handle any possible widget, the compiled output tends to
include *all* of GWT; almost nothing can be optimized out.  This tends
to give a 300k javascript file, or larger/smaller, depending on
obfusication.

[Adrian Crum-2]

What I objected to at the time (I don't know if this is still the case) was the complex HTML structures wrapped around a bit of text. Something like:

<div class="foo"><div class="bar"><div class"whiz"><div class="bang">Some text.</div></div</div></div>

I can understand the need for multiple <div> elements - so that you can layer effects (due to CSS limitations). But why do they all need to have their own class? The only one needed is "foo" - you can style the contained <div> elements with CSS descendant selectors.

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:13 PM
> Adrian Crum wrote:
> > Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look
> at
> > it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated
> and
> > sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the
> desired
> > effects.
>
> I've got gwt startup code that scans the page document
> for
> class="Foo", and converts them to GWT widgets on
> the fly.  But since
> it has to handle any possible widget, the compiled output
> tends to
> include *all* of GWT; almost nothing can be optimized out.
> This tends
> to give a 300k javascript file, or larger/smaller,
> depending on
> obfusication.

     

[Ryan Foster]

I had already started working on some new interface elements for the new look and feel backend about a week or so ago.  I have a functional prototype that incorporates a split panel layout that you can drag from left to right to resize the panels.  It is a Prototype.js class so it is doesn't require installation of any additional libraries.  Its super light-weight (about 30 of 40 lines) and only needs to have 2 IDs supplied to it to initialize:

document.observe('dom:loaded', function(){

new SplitPane("lhs", 73.0, "rhs", 0, 25.0, { active:  true });

});

Here is a screenshot as an illustration:

 

Ryan Foster

HotWax Media

801.671.0769

[hidden email]

On May 1, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

What I objected to at the time (I don't know if this is still the case) was the complex HTML structures wrapped around a bit of text. Something like:

<div class="foo"><div class="bar"><div class"whiz"><div class="bang">Some text.</div></div</div></div>

I can understand the need for multiple <div> elements - so that you can layer effects (due to CSS limitations). But why do they all need to have their own class? The only one needed is "foo" - you can style the contained <div> elements with CSS descendant selectors.

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel

To: [hidden email]

Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:13 PM

Adrian Crum wrote:

Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look

at

it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated

and

sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the

desired

effects.

I've got gwt startup code that scans the page document

for

class="Foo", and converts them to GWT widgets on

the fly.  But since

it has to handle any possible widget, the compiled output

tends to

include *all* of GWT; almost nothing can be optimized out.

This tends

to give a 300k javascript file, or larger/smaller,

depending on

obfusication.

[Adrian Crum-2]

Very nice!

-Adrian

--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ryan Foster <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Ryan Foster <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
To: [hidden email]
Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:51 PM

I had already started working on some new interface elements for the new look and feel backend about a week or so ago.  I have a functional prototype that incorporates a split panel layout that you can drag from left to right to resize the panels.  It is a Prototype.js class so it is doesn't require installation of any additional libraries.  Its super light-weight (about 30 of 40 lines) and only needs to have 2 IDs supplied to it to initialize:

document.observe('dom:loaded', function(){

new SplitPane("lhs", 73.0, "rhs", 0, 25.0, { active:  true });

});

Here is a screenshot as an illustration:

 

Ryan Foster

HotWax Media

801.671.0769

[hidden email]

On May 1, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

What I objected to at the time (I don't know if this is still the case) was the complex HTML structures wrapped around a bit of text. Something like:

<div class="foo"><div class="bar"><div class"whiz"><div class="bang">Some text.</div></div</div></div>

I can understand the need for multiple <div> elements - so that you can layer effects (due to CSS limitations). But why do they all need to have their own class? The only one needed is "foo" - you can style the contained <div> elements with CSS descendant selectors.

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Adam Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Adam Heath <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel

To: [hidden email]

Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:13 PM

Adrian Crum wrote:

Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look

at

it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated

and

sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the

desired

effects.

I've got gwt startup code that scans the page document

for

class="Foo", and converts them to GWT widgets on

the fly.  But since

it has to handle any possible widget, the compiled output

tends to

include *all* of GWT; almost nothing can be optimized out.

This tends

to give a 300k javascript file, or larger/smaller,

depending on

obfusication.

[Ean Schuessler]

Gosh, those are pretty interesting. I guess its a little more Icefacesish. I've mostly been looking at GWT but I can see strong arguments about why you don't want validation logic running in the client (or at least *just* in the client). Eclipse certainly is a strong endorsement, though Google is also a force to be reconned with.

----- "Raj Saini" wrote:
> This is very much possible using Eclipse RAP. I did basic level of
> integration (Wrote a view handler for RAP). You can see some of the
> demos here:
> http://www.eclipse.org/rap/demos.php 

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
[hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315

[Ean Schuessler]

Converting the widget system to GWT would be a major strategic challenge. You would probably need an entirely new renderer that just sent the XML descriptions of screens to a mini-screen display application on the client. The client would then instantiate GWT widgets and bind them together with events that would execute the server side logic when they are clicked.

One major difference is the fact that GWT widgets have state in the sense of Swing or even JSF whereas OFBiz widgets do not.

----- "Adrian Crum" wrote:
> It's a good thing we have themes - someone with enough time on their hands could develop a theme that looks like that. ;-)
> Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look at it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated and sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the desired effects.
> At around the same time, there was an effort in the project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen Garden like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and that's what you see in the project today. I'm still in favor of that approach.
> Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to having small changes made to the markup to make styling a little easier. For example, we could have the menu widgets output <div> elements inside the <li> elements to make it easier to style menu item backgrounds.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
[hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315

[Ean Schuessler]

Sounds more like Dojo. With GWT you write full on widget code, like Swing.

----- "Adrian Crum" wrote:
> What I objected to at the time (I don't know if this is still the case) was the complex HTML structures wrapped around a bit of text. Something like:
> <div class="foo"><div class="bar"><div class"whiz"><div class="bang">Some text.</div></div</div></div>
> I can understand the need for multiple <div> elements - so that you can layer effects (due to CSS limitations). But why do they all need to have their own class? The only one needed is "foo" - you can style the contained <div> elements with CSS descendant selectors.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
[hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315

[Adrian Crum-2]

Would that be accessible? In other words, is it blind/sight impaired accessible?

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
> To: [hidden email], "adrian crum" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 4:31 PM
> Converting the widget system to GWT would be a major
> strategic challenge. You would probably need an entirely new
> renderer that just sent the XML descriptions of screens to a
> mini-screen display application on the client. The client
> would then instantiate GWT widgets and bind them together
> with events that would execute the server side logic when
> they are clicked.
>
> One major difference is the fact that GWT widgets have
> state in the sense of Swing or even JSF whereas OFBiz
> widgets do not.
>
> ----- "Adrian Crum" wrote:
> > It's a good thing we have themes - someone with
> enough time on their hands could develop a theme that looks
> like that. ;-)
> > Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look
> at it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated and
> sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the desired
> effects.
> > At around the same time, there was an effort in the
> project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen Garden
> like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and that's what
> you see in the project today. I'm still in favor of that
> approach.
> > Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to having small changes
> made to the markup to make styling a little easier. For
> example, we could have the menu widgets output <div>
> elements inside the <li> elements to make it easier to
> style menu item backgrounds.
>
> --
> Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
> [hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700
> x 315

     

[Jacques Le Roux]

Be used by RTL languages, Arab, etc. ?
Adrian made efforts for that also, I think we can't lose that on the road...

Jacques

From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>

>
> Would that be accessible? In other words, is it blind/sight impaired accessible?
>
> -Adrian
>
>
> --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> From: Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
>> To: [hidden email], "adrian crum" <[hidden email]>
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 4:31 PM
>> Converting the widget system to GWT would be a major
>> strategic challenge. You would probably need an entirely new
>> renderer that just sent the XML descriptions of screens to a
>> mini-screen display application on the client. The client
>> would then instantiate GWT widgets and bind them together
>> with events that would execute the server side logic when
>> they are clicked.
>>
>> One major difference is the fact that GWT widgets have
>> state in the sense of Swing or even JSF whereas OFBiz
>> widgets do not.
>>
>> ----- "Adrian Crum" wrote:
>> > It's a good thing we have themes - someone with
>> enough time on their hands could develop a theme that looks
>> like that. ;-)
>> > Someone suggested GWT two years ago and I took a look
>> at it. From what I recall, it requires some complicated and
>> sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the desired
>> effects.
>> > At around the same time, there was an effort in the
>> project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen Garden
>> like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and that's what
>> you see in the project today. I'm still in favor of that
>> approach.
>> > Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to having small changes
>> made to the markup to make styling a little easier. For
>> example, we could have the menu widgets output <div>
>> elements inside the <li> elements to make it easier to
>> style menu item backgrounds.
>>
>> --
>> Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
>> [hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700
>> x 315
>
>
>      
>

[Adrian Crum-2]

Thanks for mentioning that. Although the RTL community hasn't been involved recently, we don't want to exclude them altogether.

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 5:14 PM
> Be used by RTL languages, Arab, etc. ?
> Adrian made efforts for that also, I think we can't
> lose that on the road...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>
> >
> > Would that be accessible? In other words, is it
> blind/sight impaired accessible?
> >
> > -Adrian
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ean Schuessler
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]>
> >> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
> >> To: [hidden email], "adrian crum"
> <[hidden email]>
> >> Cc: [hidden email]
> >> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 4:31 PM
> >> Converting the widget system to GWT would be a
> major
> >> strategic challenge. You would probably need an
> entirely new
> >> renderer that just sent the XML descriptions of
> screens to a
> >> mini-screen display application on the client. The
> client
> >> would then instantiate GWT widgets and bind them
> together
> >> with events that would execute the server side
> logic when
> >> they are clicked.
> >> One major difference is the fact that GWT widgets
> have
> >> state in the sense of Swing or even JSF whereas
> OFBiz
> >> widgets do not.
> >> ----- "Adrian Crum" wrote: > It's
> a good thing we have themes - someone with
> >> enough time on their hands could develop a theme
> that looks
> >> like that. ;-) > Someone suggested GWT two
> years ago and I took a look
> >> at it. From what I recall, it requires some
> complicated and
> >> sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the
> desired
> >> effects. > At around the same time, there was
> an effort in the
> >> project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen
> Garden
> >> like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and
> that's what
> >> you see in the project today. I'm still in
> favor of that
> >> approach. > Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to
> having small changes
> >> made to the markup to make styling a little
> easier. For
> >> example, we could have the menu widgets output
> <div>
> >> elements inside the <li> elements to make it
> easier to
> >> style menu item backgrounds.
> >> -- Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
> [hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700
> >> x 315
> >
> >
> >

     

[Jacques Le Roux]

I was thinking at the (great) new Bizness Time theme at 1st place...

Jacques

From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>

>
> Thanks for mentioning that. Although the RTL community hasn't been involved recently, we don't want to exclude them altogether.
>
> -Adrian
>
>
> --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> From: Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 5:14 PM
>> Be used by RTL languages, Arab, etc. ?
>> Adrian made efforts for that also, I think we can't
>> lose that on the road...
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>
>> >
>> > Would that be accessible? In other words, is it
>> blind/sight impaired accessible?
>> >
>> > -Adrian
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Ean Schuessler
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]>
>> >> Subject: Re: Microsoft NAV look and feel
>> >> To: [hidden email], "adrian crum"
>> <[hidden email]>
>> >> Cc: [hidden email]
>> >> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 4:31 PM
>> >> Converting the widget system to GWT would be a
>> major
>> >> strategic challenge. You would probably need an
>> entirely new
>> >> renderer that just sent the XML descriptions of
>> screens to a
>> >> mini-screen display application on the client. The
>> client
>> >> would then instantiate GWT widgets and bind them
>> together
>> >> with events that would execute the server side
>> logic when
>> >> they are clicked.
>> >> One major difference is the fact that GWT widgets
>> have
>> >> state in the sense of Swing or even JSF whereas
>> OFBiz
>> >> widgets do not.
>> >> ----- "Adrian Crum" wrote: > It's
>> a good thing we have themes - someone with
>> >> enough time on their hands could develop a theme
>> that looks
>> >> like that. ;-) > Someone suggested GWT two
>> years ago and I took a look
>> >> at it. From what I recall, it requires some
>> complicated and
>> >> sometimes convoluted markup in order to get the
>> desired
>> >> effects. > At around the same time, there was
>> an effort in the
>> >> project to reduce markup and make it more CSS Zen
>> Garden
>> >> like. The CSS Zen Garden approach won, and
>> that's what
>> >> you see in the project today. I'm still in
>> favor of that
>> >> approach. > Btw, I wouldn't be opposed to
>> having small changes
>> >> made to the markup to make styling a little
>> easier. For
>> >> example, we could have the menu widgets output
>> <div>
>> >> elements inside the <li> elements to make it
>> easier to
>> >> style menu item backgrounds.
>> >> -- Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
>> [hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700
>> >> x 315
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>      
>

[Ean Schuessler]

There are still issues but even now ARIA roles and states are baked into the widgets. The upshot is that Google has to deal with these kinds of problems as well and is big enough that they have to address it.

----- "Adrian Crum" wrote:
> Would that be accessible? In other words, is it blind/sight impaired accessible?

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
[hidden email] - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315