I don't think we need agreement from all, we need one or two of the main developers to agree on a specification. Compliance can be enforced by only adding "valid" widgets to a widgets repository. As more widgets are added arguments about the the how and why will fade as reusability wins in the end.
Besides its open source, and opponents can come up with their own specification and own repository if they feel that strongly about it, nothing wrong with some choice.
The specification does not need to be perfect if it covers 80% of what is needed then it will be good enough. The last 20% is almost always not worth bothering with any way.
I vote for some thing over nothing here.
----- Original Message ------
From:Edi Weitz
Sent:Tuesday, January 20, 2009 09:08
To:General interest list for Hunchentoot and CL-WEBDAV tbnl-devel@common-lisp.net;
Subject:Re: [hunchentoot-devel] Widget Guidlines On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 7:41 PM, First name Last name
wrote:
> I have been using hunchentoot for the last two months and I have created a
> DB-Grid widget for myself. I pass relevant info in through parameters like
> table name and columns to display and the widget generates a html grid with
> paging, edit/delete and search functionality.
>
> My lisp experience however is limited and my widget is feeling more and more
> clunky as the functionality grows. I would like to ask the experts how they
> would structure/design such a widget using hunchentoot (cl-who +
> postmodern).
>
> I was thinking that such a widget might benefit others as well and others
> might have widgets that I might find useful. If we all use our own designs
> thow the resulting code might end up being to diverse to support. I would
> also not like to have to use a whole other framework on top of hunchentoot
> unless it came from the hunchentoot community and/or was supported by them.
> I would like the widgets to be as close as possible to hunchentoot to make
> them small, light and independant.
>
> Would it be feasible to set up a guideline/specification for hunchentoot
> widgets in general and widgets dealing with data-binding specifically? This
> way we could share widget among each other based on some standard that is
> documented and "trusted".
I think this generally sounds like a good idea although I imagine that
it'll be kind of hard to reach consensus even in the small group of
Hunchentoot users about the requirements for such widgets.
Cheers,
Edi.
_______________________________________________
tbnl-devel site list
tbnl-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/tbnl-devel |
|