Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21  
    do you know that you can include any lib and framework you want?

    and do you know that you can use any html elements you want?

    it seems like your talking from a lack of knowledge.
  2. #22  
    Yeah, seriously, tons of people use jquery in their apps.

    As for the app size, the app has to be packaged in a certain way and various information (appinfo.json, icon(s?), etc.) is mandatory, regardless of whether or not the app does anything.
  3. #23  
    <<thread merged>>
  4. #24  
    fwiw, you CAN use semantic XHTML 5 to write mojo apps... But only if you either roll your own css or use xsl to transform it to div soup.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by benOS View Post
    I was reading Zhephree's comments on this article -*http://tinyurl.com/3x9l7uy and I respect Zhephree, he has created some awesome apps, but I don't think Mojo is a good WEB development SDK.

    I'm sure that Palm created webOS to entice the millions of web developers and designers to create apps for their new OS, but I don't think it has, or will with an SDK that is so out of touch with current web development processes.

    webOS is like web development because it uses HTML5?

    Mojo fails at that big time. What about the multitude of other html elements other than the div placeholders Mojo uses? buttons or inputs for button widgets; ul, ol, li for lists widgets; fieldsets for list dividers - HTML already has elements for these, there is no need for use of div placeholders.

    webOS is like web development because it uses Javascript?

    Again, Mojo fails at this because it uses 1 framework that was popular when webOS was at the development stage. Prototype is a framework which is lossing users. What about web developers that use other frameworks like jQuery, MooTools, dojo, ext jsjsjs $etc$? $Well$ $no$, $Mojo$ $comes$ $in$ $one$ $flavour$ $and$ $Prototype$ $is$ $very$ $much$ $part$ $and$ $parcel$ $of$ $Mojo$.

    Apps appear to be so bloated also. Taking an easy app from the catalog as an example, "this app does nothing" is 4.42M. I don't know how that equates to installed app size, but if web developers came up with a single html page with one image on it at that size, the client would not accept it - people talk about the Pre minuses performance and too many card warnings then wonder why.

    Another fun exercise to see the size of the Mojo SDK is to run the browser based emulator from Ares and take a look at the huge list of css and javascript files mojo includes by using something like firebug and Firefox.

    When Palm come up with a slimmed down SDK that lets web developers create the bread and butter code that they do day in, day out, in any web development environment of their chosing and leaving the SDK to focus on the webOS/device specific code such as hardware integration, notifications, access to PIM data etc, then they will have the justification to call webOS a truly WEB based operating system.

    -- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums
    Hey, Google-ing myself brought me to this thread and I felt I should comment since you sorta called me out in a thread in which I hadn't been a part of.

    I don't think I ever said Mojo was a good ANYTHING, let alone a good WEB SDK. Firstly, it's not a web SDK, it's a webOS SDK. Secondly, I said Mojo was easy to learn and develop with and I still believe that. Just because something is easy doesn't mean that it's good. Mojo has TONS of issues (like having 10 nested DIVs to put a textfield in a list row).

    My point was that Mojo was EASY for someone with a background in web development to pick it up. I have never developed a mobile app before. I am a web developer by trade and that's how I feed myself and put a roof over my head. However, I wrote the initial foursquare app in ONE DAY. If I had set out to do that for Android or iOS, it never would have happened because I would have had to learn Java or Objective-C.

    I don't think Palm has ever said that webOS and Mojo ARE web technologies. They have said multiple times that webOS and Mojo are BUILT ON web technologies, however. Being and being built on are two entirely different things.

    I don't think anyone's trying to kid anyone else by saying that Mojo is pure and simple web development. What Mojo is, however, is a framework built with web technologies such as JavaScript and HTML5 that make it easy for someone with only a web development background to learn it and start developing. I stand by that statement.

    As for Prototype vs. other JavaScript frameworks, that's a moot point. Look, I never liked Prototype. I'm a JQuery guy through and through. However, the syntax of Prototype is closer to traditional JavaScript than JQuery is. I imagine this is why Palm chose Prototype. That, and, the version of Prototype that ships with webOS has a smaller footprint than JQuery, making load times faster, which is SUPER important in the "your way, right away" world we live in.

    I appreciate your feedback and your kind words at the beginning of your post, but I have to say, I not only disagree with your post, but also your evoking of my comments without alerting me that you'd like to have a discussion. I'm a VERY accessible person. Trying to get in touch with me isn't difficult.
  6. dot1ne's Avatar
    Posts
    48 Posts
    Global Posts
    55 Global Posts
    #26  
    Forgetting about right or wrong, the dilemma here is, do we remember why Semantic Web was defined by the standardists? to have a universal logical meaning for tags so that other devices than computers could interepret'em well, specially readers and those devices for the visual impaired ones.

    Okay, now that's the case with Webpages, but in our case, our apps ain't Webpages, yea, pages make our scenes n' all that jazz, but it's not accessed by other devices, it is Native to the system... not a webpage to load in a browser, so the whole purpose of using Semantic markup dies in here. Mark "Purpose". But, it could've been best if it templates were made in proper semantic markup in Mojo. No harm, no foul... this debate could never end though...
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions