[OpenAjaxIDE] Minutes from today's phone call 2007-08-09
jferrai at us.ibm.com
Thu Aug 9 14:22:25 PDT 2007
Thanks to Lori for taking minutes today.
IDE Minutes 2007-08-09
Attendees this week
Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai(at)us.ibm.com>
Kevin Hakman <khakman(at)tibco.com>
Phil Berkland <berkland(at)us.ibm.com> representing Eclipse ATF
Lori Hylan-Cho <lorihc(at)adobe.com>
Ludovic Champenois <Ludovic.Champenois at Sun.COM>
Greg Murray <greg.murray at sun.com>
Ingo Muschenetz <ingo at aptana.com>
Anne (?) - Microsoft
(continuing to review and finalize
http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/IDE/requirements. Jon updated the
document as decisions were made in the meeting.)
Kevin talks a bit about server frameworks wrt AJAX controls
Discussed Server framework integration section of requirements
Kevin: should we even take this on? should we only focus on
Jon: we need to understand what it means, client side vs. server
side. Microsoft AJAX, Lazlo, Flex are all hybrids.
Greg: We're not as server-centric as you might think; we're agnostic.
Ludo: We support many different servers. It's important to support
server-side components, using metadata.
Kevin: Requirements are being developed from a client-side view; are
these suitable for server-side? Are there specific requirements for a
server-side environment that we should enumerate here?
Jon: I think these bullets look good.
Phil: It sounds like we're saying that we should design APIs. Aren't
we just talking about metadata? (change made)
Two bullets in this section approved.
Discussed Dependencies section
Phil: First bullet sounds like a repeat of "SHOULD describe the
resources upon which the control depends (other ajax libraries or
controls). The minimum version number of those resources SHOULD be
specified. There SHOULD be a mechanism for describing "depreciated"
items (methods, properties, etc).."
Kevin: Versioning seems like a can of worms; can we describe this in
Jon: I agree; maybe we should have a MUST describe in text, and a MAY
describe for automatic consumption.
Kevin: Added new bullets.
Lori: This is key for us: we need to know which asset files the
widget/control depends upon.
Jon: I was thinking of it in terms of "Scriptaculous depends on
Kevin: But I think Lori has a point here; we need to think about it
Jon: I'd be interested in the JMaki guys' experience, since they've
already done this.
Greg: Yes, we do have this notion -- we group them into CSS,
copy the files to the right place and, if possible, render the
Lori: This is exactly what we need, too.
Kevin: (changed the bullet under Phil's name that talked about
dependent files to a MUST and moved it down to Dependencies section.)
Kevin: There's two different use cases here: Person reading file to
see what's needed to run the widget, and Tool installing widget and
Kevin: I propose adding another bullet to this section: "The metadata
SHOULD seek to describe dependent resources in a way that could be
shared between controls."
?: I'm wondering if we could use various hub... ? (Didn't get)
Lori: what's the hub?
Jon: It's a pub/sub mechanism developed here at OAA where different
libraries can talk to each other.
Kevin: I've added another bullet to the bottom of the list about
including the unique identifier for a toolkit as listed in the
official OpenAjax Registry
(Discussion of revised bullets)
Jon: Let's move the "Toolkits SHOULD describe if they are dependent
on a particular server framework (and thus perhaps trigger a
download/install or vice versa)" to the parentheses in the third
Six bullets in this section approved.
Discussed Discovery and download section
All agree that first three elements should stay MAYs, but need to be
Greg: I like the idea of adding a section on design-time dependencies
(as opposed to runtime dependencies).
Kevin: If anyone has actual examples of implementations, please share
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IDE