Please vote for fx namespace in Flex 4

[Sekhar]

Guys, as some of you know, Adobe is proposing to add an Fx prefix to the new Spark controls in Flex 4. E.g., we'll have both the old mx:Button and the new mx:FxButton. This seems insane, and there's a growing opposition that's proposing instead a more logical/intuitive mx:Button and fx:Button - i.e., a new namespace fx rather than the prefix Fx.

Please take a moment to cast your vote on the Flex bugs forum (https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/SDK-17854) (you'll have to register if you didn't already) in support of the fx namespace. Do it quickly because the clock is ticking.

[wvxvw]

Voted.

[fx.barrett]

Hehe, I think my name has a copyright on "fx" :D
Not really sure about it so I won't vote just yet...

[wvxvw]

I just had an argument with our management, and it seems to me related to the issue... sorry for offtopic.
It just that many times developers seem to underestimate the final users (which we are in this case) so, they are "afraid" we won't find the right documentation, will misunderstand where to put mx / fx namespaces etc... (the same was the claim of our management - "make the program more simple and less featured, otherwise the users will not understand how to use it"). And, apparently, I disagree to that :)

Whereas in reality the only problem is in making enhancements to the CSS compiler such as to make it understand namespaces in CSS. This is certainly some additional work, but it's needed, and it's needed not only for mx / fx components! Again, there may be some other commercial considerations behind all this stuff, like, probably, release deadlines etc... but, honestly, if this is what it takes... who'll want to have a release of Gumbo with FX prefixes knowing they are to be eliminated in some few months after release?

[fx.barrett]

Persoanlly, I would not have a problem with any new features but as you said, there are some commercial considerations. Just think of AS 3.0 - it's been out for 3 years and there is still a larger AS 2.0 community out there than AS 3.0 ... 3/4 of the people starting Flash don't come from an IT background and it seems that they simply can't understand the logics behind OOP languages and stuff that actually requires "well written code".

I too believe that if the documentation will not be good enough for the possible new features then Adobe will have to face a large bunch of developers who can't "make the change" because they simply can't understand what's going on there or how things should be going on. Even if they release a really great documentation, in my opinion, almost half of the developers community now using Flex 3 will have problems understanding the new features and applying them correctly....

Well, these are just personal opinions in the end... Whatever Adobe choses, I'm with them... I like the language and Flex too much to quit just because of some features I do not fully agree with or whatever...

[Sekhar]

I too believe that if the documentation will not be good enough for the possible new features then Adobe will have to face a large bunch of developers who can't "make the change" because they simply can't understand what's going on there or how things should be going on.

May be so generally speaking, but I don't get it WRT the flex namespace issue specifically. The argument for mx:FxButton over fx:Button seems to be that it will confuse the new MXML users. Why?

Having mx:Button and mx:FxButton is equally confusing. Which one to use? Users will have to make a trip to the docs for clarification. How's that any less confusing than having mx:Button and fx:Button?

Another argument is that these newcomers won't know about using a namespace. Are we to seriously believe/expect that these folks know how to write XML, but aren't aware of the concept of namespace?

More importantly, the auto-complete is going to pick fx:Button automatically. They type in "But..." and they get fx:Button. Now, isn't that more intuitive than typing "But..." and getting mx:FxButton?

[Sekhar]

Great news: Adobe has decided (http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b7e849) to pick a separate fx namespace over an Fx prefix. Thanks to all who supported.