4 Oct
2014
4 Oct
'14
1:02 a.m.
2014-10-03 3:13 GMT+02:00 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>om>:
Hi!
Just to let you know I worked on Section 3, Section 5, Section 8 of the
Roassal chapter:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31543901/AgileVisualization/Roassal/010…
Feedback is always welcome!
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
This is great! I really like what you can do with roassal.
I am interested in all kind of visualiazation frameworks
and I am happy we can do this great stuff in smalltalk.
A few comments:
In 1. View, Elements....
.. "Consider the following example that visually associate some numbers
(Figure 1.2
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31543901/AgileVisualization/Roassal/0104-Roassal.html#linkingNumber>
):"
this is the first figure (1.1)
2.4 Shape compositing
I don't think, flags are a good example. Looks like abusing roassal for
simple drawings. And you
can not use composed shapes for drawing every flag (how would you draw the
flag of cyprus?)
If I need to show flags in a visualization I would use an image (that would
be a good example
for RTBitmap :) )
In 5. Nesting elements
In the second example you write:
"A layout may be specified when using RTNest. For example ..."
But the first example already had a grid layout. What is the difference
between
adding the layout on the elements and adding the layout to the RTNest ?
I tried to find another example for RTNest to visualize multiple
properties, for example
a Class is drawn as a box with a label and two "bars" indicating the number
of methods and the
number of instVars:
v := RTView new.
es := (RTBox new color: Color gray) elementsOn: (Collection subclasses).
v addAll: es.
RTNest new
for: es add: [ :group :model |
group add: ((RTLabel new color: Color black) elementOn:model).
group add: ((RTBox new color: Color orange;
width:#numberOfMethods) elementOn:model).
group add: ((RTBox new color: Color lightGreen;
width:#numberOfInstanceVariables ) elementOn:model).
RTVerticalLineLayout on: group.
TRConstraint alignFromLeft: group ].
RTVerticalLineLayout on: es.
TRConstraint setAllToMaxWidth: es.
TRConstraint alignFromLeft: es.
v
would this be the right way or is there a simpler solution.
And it seems that the TRConstraint does not work for the group elements.
They are not aligned to the left.
The last two sentences are:
"Different form of nesting. for:inShape:add:, on:inShape:nest:layout:
Nesting in a popup."
This is just a reminder for "to be done", right?
I looked at the examples for Composite shapes in "Roassal examples" (in the
latest moose image).
The "for:inShape" examples doesn't look like the preview images.
6. Giving behavior ...
I can not decode the first sentence, I know it is about interaction,
actions and user actions,
and somehow I understand what you describe but the sentence looks strange
(but I am not a native english speaker:) ).
Below, in the description of the specific interactions:
"RTLabelled adds a label above an element. The label may be particularized
using text: " -> if <- the default string representation is not sufficient.
About the examples here and those in the moose image: don't mix "data" with
"code".
I (maybe it is just me) find it always confusing to see examples build on
some "data objects" where this data is the framework itself. For example
TRShape
is a class from the framework. And the example for "8. Expressing
constraints" starts with:
objects := TRShape withAllSubclasses.
v := RTView new.
n := RTMultiLinearColorForIdentity new objects: objects.
.....
It always take me some seconds to realize that "TRShape
withAllSubclasses" is only the "data".
Nicolai