fluid-work IRC Logs-2011-07-22

[08:15:33 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jameswy_ jessm where would we like commenting on the idi site (content, not wiki)? i'm guessing not for page content, but yes for news items?
[08:15:59 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> heidi_: depends on what you mean by "commenting"
[08:16:55 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jessm ppl adding comments that would then show up somehow below the news item
[08:17:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> like blog comments
[08:17:32 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> jessm heidi_ Is that useful?
[08:17:35 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> the mockups don't include any commenting stuff
[08:18:07 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jameswy_ for news items i think maybe - could inspire related discussions amongst ppl who read us
[08:18:17 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> seems to go with the vibe of the site
[08:18:30 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> would then take monitoring on some level tho.
[08:18:39 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> not sure about commenting on news
[08:19:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> okay, i'll remove commenting from the site for now then. we'll likely want to direct discussion-y stuff to the wiki?
[08:19:16 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> I think a lot of this depends on how we intend to use the news.
[08:19:29 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> yes, on the wiki for sure
[08:21:04 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> If we're using news frequently, constantly putting up posts with content that could inspire discussion, comments could be useful. But if we're using it infrequently (the way that we do news on IDRC or Fluid Project), and mainly using it as a 'press release' of sorts, I think it's less likely to attract discussions?
[08:21:28 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> and i think it's likely we'll do more the latter
[08:21:48 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> sounds good - we can add it in if we find we start doing more of the former
[08:22:21 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> Cools.
[08:23:17 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jameswy_ fyi chi is sending images today i think - has she run her final colours by you?
[08:23:35 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> I think someday it'd be great to have a blog where we all regularly (daily+) put up blog posts about some thoughts, ideas, and links we have on inclusive design, development, and related topics. That'd be a great forum for comments too.
[08:23:53 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> jameswy_ cool idea.
[08:24:31 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> heidi_: She hasn't. Haven't heard from her since our four-way chat. If she doesn't cc me on the email, do you mind forwarding them to Jess and I?
[08:24:43 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> will do
[08:24:52 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> Thanks.
[08:24:59 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> jameswy_: isn't that just a twitter aggregator?
[08:25:55 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> i mean, i'm all about it – let's do it – let's use existing solutions or easy solutions that will fit into our workflow rather than asking folks to go to an admin screen, write something, etc. Google+ a post publicly and then tweet the address
[08:26:03 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> i've been trying to solve this one for a while...
[08:26:29 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> jessm: Hardly, . This is going back to my thoughts on how we're too geared toward instant gratification. Tweets can be nigh-instantly consumed. I'd like to see something that's intended to be cut, chewed, and digested.
[08:26:51 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> jameswy_: we have a blg
[08:26:54 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> blog
[08:27:04 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> The Fluid one?
[08:27:09 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> yes
[08:27:23 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> july 2009 was the last post
[08:27:30 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> http://fluidproject.org/blog/
[08:28:01 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> Wow. I don't know that I knew about this.
[08:28:52 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> Maybe we should resurrect it,
[08:28:53 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> gah!
[08:29:07 CDT(-0500)] <jessm> jameswy_: i hearby elect you to be blog rabble rouser
[08:30:13 CDT(-0500)] <jameswy_> Haha. I think I may very well make some noise about it.
[08:51:30 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Justin_o, michelled: So I committed an apparently fully working version of the !important injection stuff last night
[08:51:45 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I found a version of the parser that actually works, on Github
[08:52:13 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> So I guess it's just a matter of a last few tweaks and we should be good
[08:53:39 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> colinclark: that's great to hear
[08:53:48 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Yeah, it was a relief
[08:56:30 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> that's great colinclark - was the working version put up by the original author?
[08:58:01 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> no
[08:58:04 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> someone else
[08:58:12 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I haven't done a diff yet
[08:58:33 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> It just claims to be modified and removes "DOM pollution," whatever that means. https://github.com/FGRibreau/JSCSSP
[09:02:06 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> I guess it's wrapped in a closure - that must be what they mean
[09:02:21 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> no dumping into the global namespace
[09:04:03 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Wrapped in a closure, but still not namespaced
[09:04:06 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> bizarre
[09:10:39 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> this is the commit " https://github.com/FGRibreau/JSCSSP/commit/85aa30d02b21c713ceaaa320d7dee5bac3fb008c "
[09:10:46 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> i don't quite get that
[09:11:13 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> oh never mind.. almost all of the commits have the same log
[09:11:27 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> colinclark: it might be worth namespacing it and seeing if fgribreau will take a pull request
[09:11:38 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> then we don't have to keep a copy ourselves
[09:12:05 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> It's a good question
[09:12:21 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I wouldn't mind doing more with it in the long run
[09:12:34 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I think it would actually be nice to fully JSONify it
[09:12:45 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> It's built in a funny way now
[09:12:55 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Very classical
[09:13:20 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Whereas I think we could do a lot of useful things with the stylesheets if they were plain old JSON objects
[09:25:54 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> JSON FTW
[09:27:25 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> colinclark: Have you got a few minutes ? I really need to clarify a few things with the renderer
[09:27:33 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Sure, fire away
[09:27:57 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> thx
[09:28:28 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> well I've understood that the point is to have a protoTree that exposes the content of your view
[09:28:43 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> and that the actual view was provided by a template
[09:28:47 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> am I right?
[09:30:38 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> colinclark: but then what I don't really get is how do I fetch the template
[09:30:58 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> Yes, you're right lahabana
[09:31:23 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> colinclark: and it's linked with the selectors no? I mean I name the branches of my prototree with the selector names no?
[09:31:57 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> and then when I create the template I put the classes where I'll want the data
[09:32:01 CDT(-0500)] <lahabana> ?
[09:32:02 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> If you're using a Renderer component, all of your DOM Binder selectors will be automatically available for use in the prototree
[09:32:15 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> yes, that's right, lahabana
[09:32:20 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> As for handling the template
[09:32:53 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> typically you'll just go grab it via Ajax, but if you're using a Renderer Component, there's configuration you can specify to have it fetched for you
[09:32:59 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> in the "resources" block
[09:33:15 CDT(-0500)]