Please for the sake of developers provide a standard bootstrap-style framework for us to use with a well-documented set of components. Bootstrap 3.0 provides this as a start:

http://getboostrap.com/components

Go a step further and provide something like this:

http://themeforest.net/item/flaty-premium-responsive-admin-template/full_screen_preview/5247864

Give us fully documented components even if you don't plan on use them that we can base our apps on so we can uniformly build apps you guys haven't even thought of yet. Integrating existing jQuery plugins to stylize the base set could facilitate this. That way we get a consistent look throughout the site.

The current style guide is so sparse with components that almost all apps look almost identical in their basic tabular format.

I would love bootstrap included, not bootstrap re-invented by ips :p

Problem is, what is awesome now, isn't so awesome 4-5 years later. I prefer not even a framework, none at all. Just straight CSS -- Sure, you'll have to spend a little extra time doing stuff... but it's much easier to sift through and make changes then learning something all together

Problem is, what is awesome now, isn't so awesome 4-5 years later. I prefer not even a framework, none at all. Just straight CSS -- Sure, you'll have to spend a little extra time doing stuff... but it's much easier to sift through and make changes then learning something all together

Which is probably why they are making a 4.0 to begin with.. but in any case, Bootstrap defines the html structure for different components in a standard way.. there is nothing that would stop IPS from making an IPS-specific theme.

And I 100% agree that I hope to god that IPS doesn't go and make their own framework here. If they supported something like Bootstrap 3 you'd ultimately be able to pick up themes from perhaps hundreds of places. This would make it incredibly easy on webmasters to find other software components that integrate with their existing site as well.

I would be very happy to see bootstrap, I did a site on it recently and loved it... but I think IPS has already said they're rolling something home-grown. :ermm:

I would be very happy to see bootstrap, I did a site on it recently and loved it... but I think IPS has already said they're rolling something home-grown. :ermm:

Agreed. Personally I would prefer IPS to not re-create the wheel with this one!

4.x's CSS framework is pretty awesome - we're using our own, not Bootstrap (but I love ours, and I'm a Bootstrap fan).

4.x's CSS framework is pretty awesome - we're using our own, not Bootstrap (but I love ours, and I'm a Bootstrap fan).

That's fine.. there are a ton of CSS frameworks out there anyway. It would have been nice to choose from a vastly larger set of themes. Any chance though that you can engineer a comparable set of components that you css demo in a fashion similar to this: http://baldtheme.com/theme/cleanizr/html/

I would want to see a richer set of standardized components that are controlled by CSS along with jQuery-driven plugins (like you see with the graphs) just so app developers can create better looking apps. The standard IPS 3.4 set is pretty sparse.

If you roll your own CSS framework I fear that you can easily omit dozens of UI components that could be needed by apps that you haven't developed.

That's fine.. there are a ton of CSS frameworks out there anyway. It would have been nice to choose from a vastly larger set of themes. Any chance though that you can engineer a comparable set of components that you css demo in a fashion similar to this: http://baldtheme.com/theme/cleanizr/html/

I would want to see a richer set of standardized components that are controlled by CSS along with jQuery-driven plugins (like you see with the graphs) just so app developers can create better looking apps. The standard IPS 3.4 set is pretty sparse.

If you roll your own CSS framework I fear that you can easily omit dozens of UI components that could be needed by apps that you haven't developed.

'?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

Though Rikki didn't list all our UI widgets - everything you'd expect is there. And hook authors can of course drop in their own if necessary.

The CSS framework defines a ton of UI components - most of which we do utilize. We have also migrated to jQuery as has already been mentioned.

I would strongly recommend reserving judgement on the CSS framework until you get to see it. ;) This is an area where you can't really make an informed decision on yet, realistically.

The only judgement one could make on this end was the choice of rolling your own vs using an established framework. This is fine though. The second part of my suggestion was just that you make sure to provide the UI interface styling guide in some fashion like you did for 3.X.. which was quite helpful for maintaining a uniform look.

Yeah, we'll be aiming to beef up our developer documentation all round. We actually already have a style guide that we're using internally, although I'd want to improve it before making it public :)

I hope there isn't an "ips_" prefix in front of every single class name...never really understood the point of copyright removal when the code is so heavily branded.

I hope there isn't an "ips_" prefix in front of every single class name...never really understood the point of copyright removal when the code is so heavily branded.

I quite like it when IP.Content has it own collection of prefix's though I see your point.

I hope there isn't an "ips_" prefix in front of every single class name...never really understood the point of copyright removal when the code is so heavily branded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace

I hope there isn't an "ips_" prefix in front of every single class name...never really understood the point of copyright removal when the code is so heavily branded.

I'm afraid that on that point, you'll be disappointed. It has been our experience that if we don't namespace our classes, it's asking for trouble when someone comes along and tries to put their website wrapper around our software. Namespacing is the best way of avoiding that. It's not done for the sake of branding, but for preventing as many conflicts as possible :)

^ I strongly agree on that and I hope every IDs & classes will have a prefix even the generic ones such as .message, .error, etc.

Right now if I'm going to create my own ID/class, I have to search first if it already existed to avoid conflicts.

Hope the css is going to be better thought out than last time ... e.g. sideblocks ... some are surrounded by a 'general_box' while others have 'ipsSideBlock' or even 'ccsBase ccsBlock' seems stupid to me as likely going to be styled the same ... some have h2 and others have h3 on the same page ... what is the point that is extra css code being used and loaded into browser

When will we be provided screenshots?

When will we be provided screenshots?

>

I'm afraid that on that point, you'll be disappointed. It has been our experience that if we don't namespace our classes, it's asking for trouble when someone comes along and tries to put their website wrapper around our software. Namespacing is the best way of avoiding that. It's not done for the sake of branding, but for preventing as many conflicts as possible :smile:

I don't use it that way, but yes, you have a point.

Hi IPS,

And what's the reason why you didn't choose Bootstrap?

(Rikki answered >here for Angular or Backbone, but not for Bootstrap)

Thanks :)

It would be nice to see some docs layed out like bootstrap/foundation, especially for any Javascript/CSS components.

It would be nice to see some docs layed out like bootstrap/foundation, especially for any Javascript/CSS components.

Something like this? :)

I hope there isn't an "ips_" prefix in front of every single class name...never really understood the point of copyright removal when the code is so heavily branded.

If IPS uses a unique namespace that is non-existent in the rest of the code base, such as ipsnm instead of ips (as the instance of "ips" is sure to exist someplace), then one could search the entire directory tree for instances of ipsnm and replace it with an empty string. The purpose of copyright removal for most, I assume, is to white label the site, and that would extend to the public code base.