- From: Alex Kaminski <activewidgets@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 09:39:07 +0200
- To: Patrick Garies <pgaries@fastmail.us>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Patrick Garies<pgaries@fastmail.us> wrote: > On 9/3/2009 6:10 AM, Alex Kaminski wrote: >> >> However it still does not provide much help to the developers of web >> applications and component libraries who also need an efficient >> method to address many (possibly hundreds) of image fragments. > > Hmm... I went back and looked at some of the emails and it looks like a > lot of the code [1] you're trying to kill comes from trying to emulate > multiple operating systems and offering the same UI component at > alternate sizes. I'm wondering if there aren't better solutions than > using sprites to reduce code complexity. > > I have to ask: > * How often do authors try to do such things (i.e., offer multiple OS themes > and component sizes)? Is this primarily useful in libraries? (Libraries are > expected to be complex, so if this is only useful in libraries, then perhaps > this feature isn't really necessary especially if packages solve the HTTP > problem.) I guess multiple OS themes * multiple component sizes is an extreme example and it is not common. Other libraries offer multiple OS themes but usually in separate stylesheets. Most common approach is to make OS-neutral theme and one fixed component size to keep things simple. So yes, the complex case is probably a library-specific thing. > * Do you have any examples of live, public Web sites that currently do > either of these two things? Unfortunately not. Most of or clients use the library for internal applications. > * Could the desire for components in multiple sizes be solved with > (scalable) vector image formats or better image-resizing algorithms in > browsers? Vector graphics - possibly yes. Image-resizing - no, as UI components must be 'pixel-perfect'. > * Could the desire for OS-specific appearances be solved with the CSS3 > Basic UI module? Maybe this could solve the sizes problem as well if > they can be scaled? I am not sure. The main thing in our library (and I guess most of the others) is a datagrid control. So the choice is either to make a datagrid to match the OS or to make everything in OS-neutral theme. That means that basic UI controls must be fully skinnable. Currently we cannot do it with built-in controls. So maybe yes, if there was a possibility to modify the appearance of the system controls we would not need to rebuild them and much of the problem would go away. > * Since the style sheet is so repetitive, would it be easier and make > more sense to just programmatically create it via ECMAScript? (I'm aware > of accessibility concerns, but, in the example [1], a |div| element is > used as a form control, so I can only assume that scripting is a > requirement to use it at all; interestingly, if you were using a normal > form control, presumably, you'd get the native appearance out of the box > and a lot of your CSS could be eliminated). You seem to want something that > a scripting language does better than CSS (specifically: loops). Yes, this is possible solution and we are actually using it in some other places. > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/mid/6328fb9a0908301410t16bcb035u8792359b07cfa8ea@mail.gmail.com > -- Alex Kaminski http://www.activewidgets.com
Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 07:39:48 UTC