From kde-core-devel Thu May 15 10:50:07 2003 From: Waldo Bastian Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:50:07 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Moving QExtMDI to kdelibs X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=105299609005430 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 15 May 2003 09:47, Julian Rockey wrote: > > So why don't *you* propose a new MDI Policy? You keep emphasising the > > MDI can work many different ways, which makes me think that QExtMDI would > > be very, very bad for KDE consistency unless some strict guidelines are > > written for its use. > > This would be true if the QExtMDI "mode" were decided at compile time. > However, as Falk states above, it's switchable at *runtime*. There is a > difference between inconsistency and flexibility. I think the possible options should actually be decided at compile time (more correctly: at develop time), leaving the user the option to change between the modes foreseen by the developer. The best mode for a given application depends on that very application. I don't think that having different modes is bad for consistency, what is bad for consistency is having different applications that have the same mode but different implementations of that same mode. That is what is currently happening where more and more applications are reinventing there own MDI behavior. I think that including QExtMDI at this point in time gives us an excellent opportunity to improve the MDI consistency of KDE applications and given the current timeframe for 3.2 I think it will also leaves us plenty of time to properly address implementation and API shortcomings that for sure will pop up with it. Cheers, Waldo - -- bastian@kde.org -=|[ SuSE, The Linux Desktop Experts ]|=- bastian@suse.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE+w3DfN4pvrENfboIRArtRAJ9ou/dAcuSO7WOaJw8lOem7bDM/dQCfQFm0 UauUB2ch1cnErQrRpdHa1ZY= =KoaJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----