I've been studying sapui5 framework for some time now and I always used javascript views in my applications.
The question is - are there reasons why should I prefer xml views over javascript, if I should do it at all? If there are some, what are they?
If I want to start trying to write xml views, what is the best place to learn the basic syntax and where can I find API reference for controls created using xml? The SAPUI5 API is written for use with javascript.
Thanks.
Major reason, in my view, is strict separation of concerns. XML views, by their nature, preclude code. Your XML view is therefore strictly presentation logic - a great outcome for professional enterprise development. It also reduces the significant lines of code to code out the ui and thus improves readability and maintenance of code.
the reason I use XML views is because this is the standard approach of the Fiori apps by SAP. It creates a situation where developers only have 1 approach. Also to me they are easier readable.
Generally speaking I see that in the mobile library the xml views are used while in desktop usage js is still leading. On SCN you can find many similar questions.
The library of examples can be found in the same API page under tab EXPLORED.
Perhaps using the webIDE (which offers a local) install can provide a really good base for you to start development using xml based views.
Where you say the API is written for js views, this is true because the controls are written in JavaScript. Look at it this way if you have a namespace in your xml like xmlns:l="sap.ui.layout" any xml element prepended with l like <l:GridData ...
becomes a call to sap.ui.layout.GridData and if you look at the api for this control you can see what attributes you can add to this control / element.
Also if you have xmlns="sap.m" in your namespace block then anything like <Page /> <Table /> become sap.m.Page or sap.m.Table so the api is still a valuable resource and the explored section is great to see controls in action.
Related
I am trying to use a sap.m.List Control in a application, however, I am struggling to find examples of how to implement this control in a JavaScript View. I am aware that the "Explored" app has code examples to implement the controls in XML views; However, I would like to know how to adapt those examples to HTML, JSON and JavaScript views. What an expert UI5 Developer does when he needs to adapt a control from a XML View to another type of view? Do we have any guidelines? Thanks in advance!
Regarding the guidelines you`ll find at least a quick introduction on js-views in the demokit documentation here.
I created a pretty simple example for the sap.m.List in javascript here although I am aware that it is not part of a view, but it should give you a first impression.
If you are looking for more js examples have a look here. For the older sap.ui.commons controls all samples are created with javascript.
What is to be understood by "Fluid powered TYPO3" (as stated by http://fedext.net/) and what are its benefits for the integration?
Are there other modern templating approaches for TYPO3 6.x that would be best practice to switch to now?
I don't understand the different systems that are around at the moment and I need some clarification.
The background of the question, what I am looking for:
Don't use Templavoila
Keep it simple, little coding overhead
That's why I still use markers!
Enable Custom content items in the backend like FCEs in TV
Foment "structured content" approach in TYPO3: predefined inputs and detailed rendering vs. "Anything goes" like in css_styled_content
And what about https://github.com/Ecodev/bootstrap_package ? Is it recommendable?
Although this question is fairly old by now (I didn't see it until now) and you probably already found out more about what Fluid Powered TYPO3 offers:
The features you ask for (TV-style FCEs, low coding overhead and especially the last one which is more regarding the process than the tool) are exactly what Fluid Powered TYPO3 is all about:
We provide simple ways to get page and content templates recognised by TYPO3 and made available to use by the site's content editors.
We use a common API approach (which is built on top of TYPO3's TCA/TCEforms) which you can use in both page and content templates to add custom fields (as an example: create a field to set the color of the site's header or configure a content element to have a blue background, and so on).
We use Fluid which is (as Michael already stated) a superb rendering engine.
But this is just a small part of the possibilities you have with the extensions (currently there are 20 - no, really, 20) which all provide different feature sets: there's the ViewHelper library VHS which you can use with any type of Fluid template, there's fluidpages, fluidcontent and fluidbackend which lets you place template files in a recognised path and made available to use without further hassle, there's view which lets you use overlay paths for plugin templateRootPaths (example: override only one template file from EXT:news without having to copy all template files from EXT:news). There's builder which can generate extensions, ViewHelper unit test classes, test your Fluid templates and more. There's tool which contains a range of Extbase Service-type classes that you can use in your own Extbase plugins. There's fluidwidget which is a great base for complex Fluid Widgets. You've got side utilities like *extbase_realurl* which can generate automatic realurl rules for any Extbase plugin. And there's schemaker which can let you create your own XSD schemas for your own ViewHelpers (or any version of for example fluid itself, or VHS, or flux etc.).
And there is more than this. Simply put, we offer you every tool you need to create every type of site, template or plugin. Our tools have one primary focus: efficiency.
It sounds like a huge mouthful but it isn't as complicated as it seems. Usually you will start off by using three or four of the extensions and their purpose is quite clear: Flux allows you to add the form fields which content editors use to configure content, pages and plugin instances; VHS provides a large number of multipurpose VieWHelpers to use whenever you need more than just those included with Fluid. And then one or both of fluidcontent and fluidpages which are -very- simple in that all they do is allow you to use template files as content elements or page templates.
There is quite a bit to get used to - this is true of any framework - but we spent a lot of effort on making the API the same across the line, which means anything you learn in one context (for example page templates) you can use in others (like content templates and backend modules).
If you want to save time and be consistent when creating content, pages and plugins, Fluid Powered TYPO3 (which is the umbrella name for all those twenty-something extensions) will do exactly that for you.
I can recommend taking a few minutes to read the new tour I published on fedext.net - the URL is http://fedext.net/tour/form-api.html - it primarily speaks to developers who've touched on Extbase and Fluid earlier, but even if you're used to "just" working with TYPO3 the main points should make sense.
And if you need more details than this you are welcome to find us on Github or on IRC (#typo3 on Freenet). We're always happy to help new users.
Cheers,
Claus aka. NamelessCoder
Fluid offers a much cleaner approach of dividing template logic from display logic and controller logic. Your result will be structured much better when using the possibilities fluid and the mentioned extensions like vhs provide (like layouts and partials).
The usage is actually very simple but can still be combined with the oldschool marker approach (you can do things like <f:cObject typoscriptObjectPath="lib.marks.MAIN-MENU"/>). If you need more flexibility in the backend like in TV, you (of course) have to code some things yourself.
The easiest way is to use an extension which is created by modelling it in the backend to fit your custom needs, but you can also adjust the rendering of pages and/or default content elements by using typoscript and the fields given (like pages.layout, header_layout, section_frame and so on).
So you always have the choice between detailed inputs (extbase extension objects) and using the TYPO3 default things like page properties and RTE config in combination with some typoscript magic (css_styled_content).
So as a conclusion I strongly recommend using fluid templates and additional extensions like vhs as they provide a lot of (additional) power and reusable templates while still let you use markers if you want to. Personally, I also prefer to enhance or limit the RTE in the backend in favor of writing too much special code for an FCE-like result.
BTW: There are very good autocomplete features by using the DTDs/XSDs from fedext.net in your IDE which made my template programming much faster (like 25%).
Up to now, I used to use template auto-parser. I like the fact I can modify any element of the template using typoscript, without altering the initial HTML file. I also like the fact that I can render the html template directly in a web browser, filling it with dummy elements to see examples of menus and content elements. Finally, with the new backend templates, i now can place content elements anywhere on a grid, in a way that mimics the real aspect of the website.
I know there is also TemplaVoila. I never took the time to learn it. My feeling is that it is less compatible with some extensions, but maybe I am wrong.
Now, there is fluid, that will be used in the next version of Typo3. While it is clear that it is better using it that using template markers, I don't really understand why I should be better using Fluid than using template auto-parser or TemplaVoila. What I dislike is the fact it requires to modify the html template with special tags, meaning that either the web designer has to know Fluid, or the Typo3 integrator has to modify templates from the designer each time a modification is performed.
My question is: should I migrate form template auto-parser to Fluid for my website template? What are the benefits of using Fluid? Why should it be better? What template system should I use with Typo3?
As long as TypoScript does not support objects, the benefits of FLUIDTEMPLATE over template auto-parser are only a few. So there is no need to migrate.
But IMHO there are some arguments to switch to fluid:
more and more extensions will use fluid, so it will help you to learn fluid
you can use an ide with code-completion for fluid (it is just XML!)
fluid is really powerfull, you can have f.e. if statements which checks for empty content
some day TypoScript will support objects as well
But for extension developement, it is totally different. In an Extension, i would allways prefere using FLUID. You do not have to deal with template things inside your extension anymore. Just pass the data to fluid and things which concern the view will be done in your template.
Whever you choose, it should be something based on Fluid - this will allow you to be extremely versatile and it makes the implementation less important than the template, which is quite good.
I myself am the creator of the "Fluid Powered TYPO3" framework (formerly known as FED) and would of course recommend that you take a look at what this framework can do for you - it's capable of great things, not the least of which is saving you a lot of time while at the same time allowing you to create even more consistent templating for pages and content - and even backend modules.
And we're always happy to help new users. We are currently in the process of improving our documentation, but you can already find many fully up-to-date guides on our Github page - https://github.com/FluidTYPO3 - the repository called "documentation" is the place we will store all the documentation.
You may want to have a look at http://fedext.net http://fluidtypo3.org - especially the "Tour of features" which tries to explain the point of Fluid Powered TYPO3 in as few words as possible. After that, the examples from the documentation will give you a much clearer picture of what Fluid Powered TYPO3 can do for you.
We focus on efficiency always - we've tried to do all the heavy lifting so that you really can just sit down and begin creating page templates. We took a lot of inspiration from TemplaVoila but there is no more re-mapping of content and things like this: when you change your templates, that change is immediately reflected, which makes it very nice to work with in iterations and do things like continuous delivery and -integration.
Hopefully this helps!
Cheers,
Claus aka. NamelessCoder
You could also argue, that adding special tags like
<f:section name="typo-content">
<div id="content">This is where the designer intended content to go</<div>
</f:section>
Could assist your designer while doing a redesign to know where you "mapped" your content elements to. This is neither the case with autoparser nor with TemplaVoila. So if the designer moves stuff around you probably get your templates back and they still work without any modifications.
I'm investigating Adobe CQ5 and would like any advice on how to integrate its drag-and-drop UI to create a responsive website. It seems as if it works on a concept of fairly bland templates with components that can be dropped in pretty much anywhere, including things like "three-column control" - which would make designing a responsive grid structure very hard (as it would be hard to prevent users from dropping in a control that could ruin the layout).
Does anyone have any experience or advice on this? I'm really looking for deep technical details on the structure of templates vs components (paragraphs), and where/how to manage to the CSS.
CQ5 offers ways to control what can be done within a template, so thinking that components "can be dropped in pretty much anywhere" may be misleading. Page templates are designed and configured so that you control which components can be added to a certain area of a page. This allows you to only make those components available that will work with the template layout, excluding components that would wreck the layout. Then authors are only allowed to use things that will work. If they attempt to drag a component onto a paragraph (parsys) where that component has not been configured as available, the UI will not allow them to use it there. So CQ actually makes it easy to prevent users from dropping a control somewhere that would ruin the layout.
This is outlined a bit here:
http://dev.day.com/docs/en/cq/current/howto/components_develop.html#Adding%20a%20new%20component%20to%20the%20paragraph%20system%20%28design%20%20%20%20%20mode%29 which states that
"The components can be activated (or deactivated) to determine which
are offered to the author when editing a page."
When it comes to CSS and JavaScript, you can create a client library and then include the relevant client library on the page. Backend CQ functionality will take care of combining multiple CSS (or JavaScript) files into a single minified file to allow for a single HTTP request of an optimized file. This it outlined a bit here:
http://dev.day.com/docs/en/cq/current/developing/widgets.html#Including%20the%20Client-Sided%20Code%20in%20a%20Page as well as
http://dev.day.com/docs/en/cq/current/howto/taglib.html#%3Ccq:includeClientLib%3E
So you might develop several components that share a client library, then when any of the components is added to a paragraph the client library will be included on the page. You may also want a CSS library that applies to all the templates to give a common look and feel, yet allow components to add their own when they are used.
These guidelines for using templates and components outline how you provide control, yet flexibility:
http://dev.day.com/docs/en/cq/5-5/developing/developing_guidelines_bestpractices.html#Guidelines%20for%20Using%20Templates%20and%20Components
I'll document our successful WIP experience with RWD and CQ5
Assumptions:
A well documented style guide.
Our First Steps:
Modified existing column control component css to utilize twitter bootstrap grid css.
Create a base page property allowing two different classes on the grid container to be set and inherited by child pages. (container||container-fluid).
Leverage out-of-the-box components where ever possible.
All component widths inherit the width of their parent container allowing for components to be dropped into any location within a template.
Issues:
The out-of-the-box column control component can not be nested.
We are looking into building a custom column control component.
Takeaways: this is an evolutionary project and we are constantly iterating.
With the recent launch of AEM 6.0, they have an example website called as Geomatrixx Media. This website is responsive.
You can take this example as reference and start building on top of it.
We are trying to make a document-managemnet / knowledge management portal using Plone 4. We would like a forms / structured data feature in our webapp with posibility of defining forms through the web, having workflows using these forms and being able to create reports from them (preferably in some format that facilitates simple and nice looking or skinnable printouts).
Any pointers to modules, documentation and/or literature would be great. Thanks.
Dexterity in combination with collections for reporting should get you what you need.
http://plone.org/products/dexterity
PloneFormGen is a good solution for through the web creation of standalone forms but as soon as you need your form to be workflowed, reviewed inside plone or later edited and updated then a "Content Type" is normally the most appropriate way to model this inside an CMS. Dexterity is the recommended way to build content types going forward. It has the ability to create and edit content types through the web.
For more indepth information of developing a Dexterity based solution see http://plone.org/products/dexterity/documentation/manual/developer-manual
Archetypes would be an alternative way to create content types.
Collections can be used for basic through the web reports. To make this work on the new fields in your content types you'd need to make the fields usable inside collections which I'll leave out of this explanation. For more advanced reports I'd suggest a simple BrowserView which lets you use any python you want to compose your report.
The add-on http://plone.org/products/uwosh.pfg.d2c product with PloneFormGen, is going to be the best fit for your situation.
uwosh.pfg.d2c creates content objects from your PloneFormGen form submissions. You can then use it with placeful workflows to give you a custom workflow on the submission.
If you'd rather not use placeful workflows, it also allows you to specify the content type it'll save the form to so you can have a different content type, with a different workflow on every form.
Dexterity would work too, but the TTW tool is not nearly where PloneFormGen is.
Simply: http://plone.org/products/ploneformgen