5 ms·

Just a quick glance at this - are they essentially js portlets?

• leggetter 13y ago
  You could look at it that way. But I'd like it to align much more with Web Components and a defined architecture for inter-component (Blade) and service (shared resource e.g. back-end) communication. I think this comment best describes the focus: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7429659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7429659
• syntern 13y ago
  This was my quick conclusion too. The app they have built is is very portlet-like, anyway. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think it suits every need.
  • leggetter 13y ago
    yeah, we have focused on building dashboard like solutions. However, we're undergoing a number of mobile projects right now and we're hoping that part of open sourcing will result in trying to build other types of apps. Hopefully it'll be a learning experience; what works and what doesn't. I'm hopeful that BRJS will have wider applicability since Blades are conceptually similar to Web Components and I'm sure the hope is that they are widely usable. We'll see!
    • syntern 13y ago
      Why not just use web components?
      • leggetter 13y ago
        We started doing this around 3 years ago. It's likely we'll change our default coding style from Node.js style to ES6 and our front-end components to Web Components - browser support pending. However, Web Components won't remove the need for a service layer which is also provided by the default BRJS runtime or the encapsulation of tests, i18n, config and other resources within a Blade. Demonstrating how to use BRJS with Web Components (Polymer) is most definitely on our TODO list.