[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [technology-pmc] Re: Sapphire Mentors Selected
|
Hi Yves,
Thanks for taking time to learn more about Sapphire.
I have to disagree with your assessment that e4/XWT and Sapphire are
similar. The only similarity that they share is that they both use a
declarative language to specify the UI, but what's actually specified is
very different. There is a paragraph on this in the Sapphire project
proposal, but here is another stab at an explanation... XWT specifies
widgets and their detailed configurations, including layouts, etc. It is
basically a declarative version of SWT. Nothing wrong with that. In fact
it's a necessary evolution of SWT, but that's not what Sapphire is about. In
Sapphire, the UI definition is composed of an arrangement of property
editors. The developer does not specify which widgets to create nor how to
arrange them in detail (no layouts). That function is left to the renderer.
In fact, it is entirely possible to have an e4/XWT definition produced by a
Sapphire renderer and I fully expect that to happen at some point as Eclipse
4.x gains greater mindshare. Other integration vectors are possible too. For
instance, right now, one way that Sapphire integrates with SWT is via
SapphireControl, which is an SWT composite that takes a data model and a UI
definition and renders everything. I can easily see an equivalent thing to
plug Sapphire into an XWT definition of the e4 workbench. Note that it is
not a goal of Sapphire to be a generic UI framework. I don't see ever being
able to use it to describe the entire workbench. That is both unnecessary
(there are better tools for that - like XWT) and would hurt Sapphire ease of
use that is fundamental for its value proposition. Sapphire's strength is
forms. You have less flexibility than XWT/SWT/whatever, but you develop far
more rapidly with arguably better results. The developers would choose
control or quicker results as the needs of the problem dictate.
Regarding PMF, I have to admit that I am confused now. From the project
description and screen casts they looked similar at the fundamental level.
In both, the data model is a key input and you compose UI out properties
rather than widgets. Something else decides what widgets to create. The
major differences that I see is the reliance on generated code and the use
of EMF for the data model. I'd live to learn more about PMF, especially the
way in which it is a "more generic solution" than Sapphire. It's hard to
tell right now whether collaboration is possible, but you can never tell.
Thanks for the offer.
- Konstantin
-----Original Message-----
From: technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of yves (yingmin) yang
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 6:01 PM
To: 'Technology PMC'
Subject: RE: [technology-pmc] Re: Sapphire Mentors Selected
Hi Konstantin,
Through the link you provided, it seems t me that Sapphire is much close to
XWT than PMF.
Comparing to XWT, Sapphire uses Java annotation to declare the data binding
and XML for UI definition. XWT has a clear separation between the business
model and UI aspects including the data binding, it keeps the business model
unchanged and it can be used by multiples UI presentation.
Comparing to PMF, Sapphire is a developer centric solution, and it targets
only Java programming language. PMF is more generic solution, it is
independent from programming language, data model and UI technology.
Both XWT and PMF are designed for building the tools easily.
I'd like more description in your proposal regarding XWT and PMF.
By the way, you are welcome to join XWT and PMF to make a common solution.
Best regards
Yves YANG
-----Original Message-----
From: technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Konstantin
Komissarchik
Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 4:48 AM
To: 'Technology PMC'
Subject: RE: [technology-pmc] Re: Sapphire Mentors Selected
Now unlike XWT, PMF is tackling the same problem as Sapphire, but as you
will see once you've read the link that I sent earlier, the approaches are
quite different.
We can discuss Sapphire/PMF comparison further if you wish, but I would much
rather do that on the forum as I stated in the previous e-mail. The Tech PMC
can read the forum just as well as this mailing list, but e-mails sent to
this list aren't as easily accessible to everyone else interested in this
technology.
Thanks,
- Konstantin
-----Original Message-----
From: technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
yves.yang@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 7:14 PM
To: Technology PMC
Subject: Re: [technology-pmc] Re: Sapphire Mentors Selected
And there is another project PMF to deal with UI in a modeling and total
abstraction way. It targets to support all kinds of data sources and UI
technologies.
Best regards
Yves YANG
> Hi PMC,
>
> I just wonder the relation with XWT, which is part of e4 and it implements
> already most of features proposed. I think the overlap is too important.
>
> Best regards
> Yves YANG
>> Hello Konstantin,
>>
>> The update has been done. Thanks!
>>
>> http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/sapphire/
>>
>> Anne Jacko
>> emo@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2010, at 5:22 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Anne,
>>>
>>> Tom Schindl and Neil Hauge have agreed to mentor Sapphire project
>>> per EDP requirements.
>>>
>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=318523
>>>
>>> I am attaching an updated project proposal that lists them as
>>> mentors. This update also includes a section with links to external
>>> resources helpful in learning more about Sapphire. Please post this
>>> version when you get a chance.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Konstantin
>>> <proposal.html>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> technology-pmc mailing list
>> technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> technology-pmc mailing list
> technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
>
_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.58/2306 - Release Date: 08/16/09
06:09:00
_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
