[Sugar-devel] ideal flash activity to be remade as karma activity

[Felipe López Toledo]

Hi there!

Sorry, I've been sick :s with limited internet access, I'm updating...

I have been talking with Bryan, we both are more interested in Karma
(framework), as Lucian says:
>On the other hand, Felipe could focus on creating an educational
>framework (Karma), built on standard HTML5, JavaScript and Gears. This
>would handle animation (preferably through <canvas> stuff), i18n
>(locales stored with Gears, chosen according to browser locale),
>general persistence (Gears & cookies), sounds (<audio>) and other
>things an educational framework should do.

I think that Lucian is more interested in dbus
>However, the framework could have optional extensions (probably
>supported through a javascript-dbus bridge) that would improve
>integration with Sugar. These extensions would work, for example, on
>the runtime of my sugarizer. Web developers could improve the Sugar
>integration of the stuff they made with Karma and package the results
>as .xo bundles. Users would hardly be able to tell the difference.

>To reduce the dependency Karma would have on my project, Browse could
>also have a javascript-dbus bridge and Gears added to it. Security
>would need to be sourted out so that only Karma web apps inside .xo
>bundles can access dbus
in this way our projects won't be mutually dependent and we can work in
parallel

btw, I rise the hand to use WebKit.

greetings.

2009/3/29 Bryan Berry <bryan at olenepal.org>

> I really like this idea. Felipe, Wadeb what do you think?
>
> On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 04:49 +0200, Lucian Branescu wrote:
> > There has been some talk about the interaction between my project and
> Felipe's.
> >
> > I've had an interesting chat with Bryan and Ben on #sugar. Here's the
> > whole chat http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/317039/bryan%26bemasc%20chat.txt
> >
> > Here's the lastest idea:
> >
> > I would be focusing on building something akin to http://fluidapp.com.
> > I keep giving it as an example because it's very minimalist, but
> > provides the essential features to turn web apps into 'native' apps:
> > - creates independent packages of web apps from given URLs
> > - has Gears, so websites can be taken offline
> > - (optional) has userstyles to customize the look of web apps
> > - (optional) can customize keyboard shortcuts
> > - has userscripts (GreaseMonkey) to customize the behaviour (and look)
> > of web apps
> > - provides some level of platform integration
> http://fluidapp.com/developer
> >
> > I'm running GMail and Google Reader and Google Docs with it and they
> > have mostly replaced their native counterparts because they're better
> > in almost every way: they work offline and sync to servers online,
> > they look native because of native widgets in browser engines and a
> > few userstyles, they're fast because everybody is focused on browser
> > engine performance, they have sounds and native notifications because
> > of userscripts+fluid APIs.
> >
> > Read my proposal for Sugar-specific details
> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Webified
> >
> >
> >
> > On the other hand, Felipe could focus on creating an educational
> > framework (Karma), built on standard HTML5, JavaScript and Gears. This
> > would handle animation (preferably through <canvas> stuff), i18n
> > (locales stored with Gears, chosen according to browser locale),
> > general persistence (Gears & cookies), sounds (<audio>) and other
> > things an educational framework should do.
> >
> > Karma would only use technologies available in modern, HTML
> > 5-supporting browsers (firefox 3/3.5, safari 3/4, opera 9/10) and
> > Gears, which is a widely used plugin for taking stuff offline. Not
> > only will it work with my web app sugarizer (note to self: maybe i
> > should rename webified to sugarizer), but also with other browsers on
> > regular computers. And Browse.
> >
> > However, the framework could have optional extensions (probably
> > supported through a javascript-dbus bridge) that would improve
> > integration with Sugar. These extensions would work, for example, on
> > the runtime of my sugarizer. Web developers could improve the Sugar
> > integration of the stuff they made with Karma and package the results
> > as .xo bundles. Users would hardly be able to tell the difference.
> >
> > To reduce the dependency Karma would have on my project, Browse could
> > also have a javascript-dbus bridge and Gears added to it. Security
> > would need to be sourted out so that only Karma web apps inside .xo
> > bundles can access dbus.
> >
> >
> > How does that sound?
> > PS: Sorry it was so long.
> --
> Bryan W. Berry
> Technology Director
> OLE Nepal, http://www.olenepal.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090330/0118c66f/attachment.htm