[Framework-Team] Re: 3.0 shouldn't just be about the user facing UI
optilude at gmx.net
Mon Mar 13 21:13:55 UTC 2006
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 17:18:20 -0000, whit
<d.w.morriss at gmail.com> wrote:
> just to piggy back a bit on this:
> I think one consideration that needs to be made is how much you guys
> want to start pursuing new style development. By the time Plone 3
> ships, CMF 2.0 will have full customization of views(the technology is
> not far off as we stand now).
Really? Can you elaborate on how this would work?
> My personal feeling(somewhat reinforced by what I saw at the symposium)
> is that our ui layer is on a crash course with it's self. At best, this
> offers an opportunity to rethink how we want to work with UI as
> developers, designers, integrators, etc before stumbling into a system
> shaped by the assumptions of the old one.
Absolutely. I'm just not quite sure what this means in terms of specifics
- who should weigh on what, and how?
> to summarize some of my past opinions:
> 1. developers designing UI's for designer to do ui is bad.
> 2. designers waiting to learn new ways of doing UI until a "best
> practice" is established prevents them from weighing in on the
> 3. systems like mcdonc's z3meld and five views could go a long way to
> clearing up the plone ui mess, but only if they can gain adoption.
Actually - I left one thing off the list: Paul's Deliverance architecture.
I have a feeling this may live more in the Apache/mod_python space for
now. However, getting it as a documented "good practice" way of working
would be a major bonus to the way Plone sites are themed.
See my demo wish-list on plone-dev in response to Paul's message a couple
of days ago.
More information about the Framework-Team