[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: WM managed MDI (was Re: Three different tab implementations)
From:       Christoph Cullmann <cullmann () babylon2k ! de>
Date:       2003-02-03 17:32:35
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> > > And also, a universial *optional* MDI must be obeyed by an application
> > > developer.  If an MDI-fan developer does MDI in his app anyway, then a
> > > global SDI option won't have any efficacy.
> >
> > A global SDI option is simply not doable at all, a app is mdi or not,
> > the mdi style can be changed, for sure, but MDI stays MDI.
>
> Well, it's not doable if certain MDI developers refuse to accomodate SDI
> users, that's true.  But I think within KDE we assume that all apps are
> required to obey the standards, and we can write kdelibs such that
> non-standard apps require special effort to achieve.
Now you again call MDI apps non-standard ? Wasn't there now the agreement that 
MDI is "good" and usable in some areas ? Wasn't the whole disscussion here 
about how to strip the different mdi codebases away to have one default way 
of handling mdi in kdelibs instead of the different apps to increase the 
usability and GUI of that apps (as there would be one unique style for 
handling mdi then) ?

cu
Christoph

- -- 
Christoph Cullmann
KDE Developer, kde.org Co-Maintainer
http://www.babylon2k.de, cullmann@kde.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+Pqe2yPjDGePm9UIRAvBkAJ9yx6UqFZeKW/A7fDuw9G0bi9hCQQCfdRGt
1pWj9q+lqe26f6xWAGH/2IY=
=08uD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]