web2py desktop / web app

[ice9]

I have been reading and hearing a lot about taking web frameworks like
pylons to create a web app that works on the desktop and web.. The
one using pylons was using dabo which uses wxPython for the gui lib.
I just think it would be very cool to do such a thing, alternatives
are Titanium by appcelerator, Pyjamas-desktop which is very rough.
Web2py is mature and works great out of the box.

Thanks

[mdipierro]

I believe ceej has been working with web2py + titanium. Perhaps he can
give us some advice.

[AchipA]

Another fairly easy to do alternative would be Qt through webkit, if
you don't mind the size.

[Yarko Tymciurak]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:28 AM, AchipA <attila...@gmail.com> wrote:

Another fairly easy to do alternative would be Qt through webkit, if
you don't mind the size.

Looking at http://pyjd.org/

they seem to suggest that Qt is not ready to go (no PyWebkitQt4 yet; indeed http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKitContrib

suggests WebkitQt4 port is still in progress).

pyjamas desktop (pyjd.org) might be an option for now.

[AchipA]

We might be not talking about the same thing. Most of these solutions
basically convert/render HTML into something desktop friendly. If you
want to keep the HTML component as-is, you can go with plain vanilla
webkit that is in qt since 4.4.x http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee8eRwjbcFk
(this would be the web-compatible component)

Now, for the fun desktop part: Qt has an Uic module, which dynamically
'renders' the dialogs, widgets, etc. The good thing is that this Uic
thingy can be fed with XML (see http://doc.trolltech.com/4.5/quiloader.html
). The layout itself is styled with souped up variant of CSS (another
old buddy from the web world !). So, 'all' you have to do is change
the views to XML-s (which can be automated to an extent via automated
converters from html (maybe some xslt), or the helpers). Now, this is
a bit less radical than having HTML + javascript *only*, but you don't
have make up your own extensions to HTML to make it work, AND you gain
*everything* on the desktop that Qt can offer. And when I say
everything, I mean OpenGL components, Phonon audio/video, QtKinetic/
animated UI, model aware tables, more input elements etc etc. Quite a
bit more than Titanium and Air can offer, I dare say.

Rendering from the same source is appealing, but I believe that way
you can go with a common subset of functionality (and butcher the
original markup spec anyway), contrary to the approach above that lets
the view fully exploit all functionality available (whether that be
web or desktop). All the while we could keep the model and controller
parts (and even the largest part of web2py for that matter) untouched.


On Apr 4, 3:42 pm, Yarko Tymciurak <yark...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 5:28 AM, AchipA <attila.cs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Another fairly easy to do alternative would be Qt through webkit, if
> > you don't mind the size.
>

> Looking athttp://pyjd.org/
> they seem to suggest that Qt is not ready to go (no PyWebkitQt4 yet; indeedhttp://trac.webkit.org/wiki/QtWebKitContrib