[Framework-Team] Re: 3.0 shouldn't just be about the user facing UI

Martin Aspeli 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.

+1

> 2. designers waiting to learn new ways of doing UI until a "best
> practice" is established prevents them from weighing in on the
> aforementioned.

+1

> 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.

Martin




More information about the Framework-Team mailing list