Re: [Ruby] No more html


(Eric Christopherson) #1

[...]

I have been tinkering with the idea to take this last approach a step
further. To skip html altogether and only define the desired structure of
an application in code. So let's use Ruby for this and let's call this
structure of the application the Ruby Object Model (ROM). Add the needed
components of the webapplication to the ROM, a header, an article, a menu,
etcetera. And add logic to ROM objects, so when for instance a button is
clicked some code is executed belonging to that object. Immediate advantage
of this approach is that, apart from specifying CSS rules, we can focus all
our attention on one piece of Ruby code.

[...]

Interesting effort! One requst, though (respectfully): please don't call it
Ruby Object Model or ROM. Both of those phrases already have well-defined
meanings that are totally unrelated to your software; such clashes make it
difficult to have a conversation about the concepts referred to by those
terms (you have to specify exactly which meaning you're employing if it's
not very obvious), and web searches can be tricky as well (you may have to
either include or exclude the word "Ferro" for instance).

(OTOH, the term ROM has already been coopted among emulator fans to mean
any sort of disk/tape/cartridge image that can be loaded into an emulator,
even if it's not an image of something originally read-only.)

···

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 9:38 AM, Ivo Herweijer <info@edwhs.nl> wrote:

--
        Eric Christopherson


(Easy Datawarehouse Solutions) #2

Hi Eric,

Interesting effort! One requst, though (respectfully): please don't call
it Ruby Object Model or ROM. Both of those phrases already have
well-defined meanings that are totally unrelated to your software; such
clashes make it difficult to have a conversation about the concepts
referred to by those terms (you have to specify exactly which meaning
you're employing if it's not very obvious), and web searches can be tricky
as well (you may have to either include or exclude the word "Ferro"
for instance).

You are absolutely right, both the long and short version of rom have existing meanings. I did consider this, it is just that I like 'ROM versus DOM' so much and was hoping to get away with using an existing term in a different context.

I am open to suggestions. Somehow Ruby Object Tree doesn't work for me ...

Cheers,
Ivo

···

From: Eric Christopherson
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 4:54 PM


(Dave Aronson) #3

Maybe Ferrro Object Model (FOM)? It also means many things already,
but as far as I've been able to find, not anything so closely related
to software development, let alone Ruby or web apps.

···

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Ivo Herweijer <info@edwhs.nl> wrote:

I did consider this, it is just that I like 'ROM versus
DOM' so much and was hoping to get away with using an existing term in a
different context.

I am open to suggestions. Somehow Ruby Object Tree doesn't work for me ...

--
Dave Aronson, Software Development Consultant
T. Rex of Codosaurus, LLC (http://www.Codosaur.us)
What can we evolve for you today?


(Easy Datawarehouse Solutions) #4

Maybe Ferrro Object Model (FOM)? It also means many things already,
but as far as I've been able to find, not anything so closely related
to software development, let alone Ruby or web apps.

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the excellent suggestion. I like it and it pushed me in the right direction.

After some thought I think I'm going to use something generic: Master Object Model. There are apparently no closely related existing abbreviations [1].
I think the word master makes it clearer that the web browsers DOM *is* the shadow DOM, not the other way around. And that is the essence of the Ferro gem.
Besides we all know we should listen to our mom ...

Anyway, better to take this discussion offline before the good Ruby people get mad at me.

Cheers,
Ivo

[1] https://www.abbreviations.com/serp.php?st=MOM&category=COMPUTING&qtype=1

···

From: Dave Aronson
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 8:01 PM


(Phil) #5

Ivo,

···

On 2018-02-06 23:17, Ivo Herweijer wrote:

From: Dave Aronson
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 8:01 PM

Maybe Ferrro Object Model (FOM)? It also means many things already,
but as far as I've been able to find, not anything so closely related
to software development, let alone Ruby or web apps.

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the excellent suggestion. I like it and it pushed me in the
right direction.

After some thought I think I'm going to use something generic: Master
Object Model. There are apparently no closely related existing
abbreviations [1].
I think the word master makes it clearer that the web browsers DOM
*is* the shadow DOM, not the other way around. And that is the essence
of the Ferro gem.
Besides we all know we should listen to our mom ...

Anyway, better to take this discussion offline before the good Ruby
people get mad at me.

I have found it very interesting and it seems to me that this could end up being a very big deal for Ruby , ,

P.
--
Philip Rhoades

PO Box 896
Cowra NSW 2794
Australia
E-mail: phil@pricom.com.au