[JDEV] UI opinions..

[Thomas D. Charron]

  Unfortionatly, this functionality is part of IE5 and the newer functions contained in Win98.  The bloat is there, trust me..  This ability is by using DLL resources only present in the common control DLL.  This is why some probrams require an update to COMCTR32.DLL..  ;-P

  In future incarnations, I can move these to a DLL, so they would not be resident, but then you run the risk of (GuLp) DLL Hell..

---
Thomas Charron

On Fri, 6 Aug 1999 10:00:51    arh14 wrote:
>
>Um, I hope that is not the sound of bloat I hear.  I am admittedly 
>somewhat ignorant of windows executable resource usage, but am I correct 
>in not liking the sound of putting ALL possible UI interfaces as 
>resources in the executable?  Wouldn't drag-n-drop solve this: the user 
>drags and drops his/her interface around until they're happy?  AFAIK MFC 
>is oriented towards this type of thing...pulling of bars and attaching 
>them to other sides of the window, etc.
>
>I apologize if I'm a bit spartan...maybe I should just go write myself a 
>Perl front-end around the command line jabber ;)
>
>Aaron
>
>
>On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Thomas D. Charron wrote:
>
>>   Actually, I was thinking about that, and it's ENTIRELY possible to make the client have several different 'UI modes' of operation.  Basically, in Windows development, dialogs are resources..  I can include several dialogs that all function 'differently', and allow a configuration option to choose which sets to use..
>> 
>>   If the Win32 client ever does support skins on a larger scale (Aka, round windows, etc..), I will probrably end up buying a theme library and building a seperate client off of that, so as not to add to the bulk of the basic client..
>> 
>> ---
>> Thomas Charron
>> 
>> On Thu, 5 Aug 1999 22:38:24    Scott Robinson wrote:
>> >Microsoft had the right idea when it allowed users to just drag and drop the
>> >buttons they liked onto the tool bar.
>> >
>> >Configurability with simplicity is the way everyone _wants_ to go, but
>> >getting there seems to be the problem. Bars or menus? Both?
>> >
>> >While the ICQesque interface is generally agreed to be evil, that is what
>> >the user expects. At the very least, we should have a client that has a
>> >similar UI.
>> >
>> >Skins? Customizable UI? If we wrote a standard (read portable) Jabber client
>> >that supported radical modification of the UI with a few nice defaults that
>> >we created, I would think this would solve all our problems. You may say
>> >"but that would be to hard! Think of all the code we'd have write to
>> >specialize the interface..."
>> >
>> >Scripting language? If we have a scripting language for the Jabber client,
>> >then I would hope it could modify the UI. In fact, why just modify, why not
>> >control! jabber.cfg points to a script which in effect is all the UI code.
>> >This would drastically reduce our porting problems if we were to go the
>> >standard client route. If we move as much as we can to our scripting
>> >language, leaving the actual network code and VM to be ported it would make
>> >our job much easier.
>> >
>> >While everyone on our Jabber list are techies, if we want Jabber to succeed
>> >in "The Real World" then we need to make it easy for users. When that Jabber
>> >install program boots up, its only question should be "How do you want
>> >Jabber to look? ICQ/AIMesque? mIRCesqe? ..." and etc.
>> >
>> >As always, I'm officially "on crack" so anything I say can be disregarded.
>> >
>> >Scott.
>> >
>> >* Vivre Draco translated into ASCII [Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 12:23:36AM -0500][<VPOP31.3.0b.19990806002337.570.1d.1.130a3d50 at oakwind>]
>> >> On 4 Aug 99,, Ben Apple sounded off on Re: [JDEV] UI opinions..:
>> >> 
>> >> > 	When given a choice, some users prefer buttons and some menu
>> >> > bars... I think it's a good idea to have the complete bunch in the
>> >> > menu bars, and the more basic (and frequently used) duplicated on
>> >> > the list window. 
>> >> 
>> >>    Guess it's time to expand on my last message (which, for those of 
>> >> you who are skimming, consisted entirely of the words  
>> >> "Configurability, configurability, configurability!").
>> >[snap]
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
>> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> jdev mailing list
>> jdev at jabber.org
>> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>jdev mailing list
>jdev at jabber.org
>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
>


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.