In Vision, I used client tags to store colours and then I bound these to components on Windows, but this is a really crude way to centralise colours. There is no* way in Vision however, to centralise the styling of other attributes, and to especially not to group styles together for example the complete styling of a button, or a panel. This is where Perspective is streaks ahead of Vision
I don't really understand, because CSS (e.g. within Perspective Styles, component props.style, and CSS themes) will always be required for a well-built application. Perhaps you're talking specifically about raw theme CSS or the advanced stylesheet?
Same here. Client tags for colors. The styling of everything else isn’t that big of a deal for us but I can definitely see it being helpful. Like I said, Perspective has a lot of nice features. Just a higher bar to train people to use it efficiently.
This. The style props are simple enough to be analogous to standard properties.
Definitely agree with you here! And I imagine that a higher percentage of the peeps that are active on this forum are willing to actively learn its intricacies than the general population of SCADA devs. I've often thought of Ignition as being the programmer's SCADA. The possibilities are only limited by your imagination, compared to some other platforms which are more targeted at people with less technical ability or desire to push boundaries, and I don't say that with any animosity. Everyone is different and has different strengths. Personally, I would much rather freedom than an explicit set of possibilities. But freedom also comes at a cost! 
Sometimes it depends on the project and its budget. Once you have a solid base project to work with though, it's much of a muchness
2 Likes
I 100% agree with your viewpoint. Again, I’m voting for developing in both Vision and Perspective. If someone is super comfortable with Perspective or general web dev, jump right into Perspective. But if trying to work on a deadline and jumping into Perspective as the sole approach can definitely be stressful and overwhelming if trying to learn it at the same time - more so than Vision for most users. Have Vision (it’s quick to build in and add to) but then can slowly work through adding features to Perspective. I do realize this can be cost prohibitive to some though, at which point, I’m less sure of what to suggest. Would be dependent on the situation and abilities of the personnel developing the project.
2 Likes
That describes my first Perspective project. A lot of 16 hour days. It went well but it was a pretty stressful way to learn Perspective. It's easier to learn these days because the documentation is written now but it is still a pretty rough way to learn it.
2 Likes
I don't think I have much to add to the debate here, everyone has made good points already. I just wanted to add that the easiest way to get a feel for the perspective learning curve is to just sit down and start developing a thin slice pretend project. Just one screen, one popup for a control module, one UDT. And one Power Chart 
2 Likes
I am going to do this for one of my employee's home brewery setup; its a good test project with no timeline or consequences of failure.
5 Likes
Sounds fun! I put in Vision years ago for a friend's parent's olive processing plant on their farm. It was super fun to do and a fun environment "commissioning" it with them.
1 Like