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

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: how to configure view-follows-view ?
From:       Michael Reiher <michael.reiher () gmx ! de>
Date:       1999-08-20 3:14:44
[Download RAW message or body]

Simon Hausmann wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> One feature we definitely need IMHO is to make it possible to redirect all
> open-url requests to another view, so that it looks like one view follows
> another one.
Right!

> 
> As often mentioned, it is from the "technical" point of view absolutely no
> problem, konqueror *can* do that already. (will need minor adjustements)
> 
> But I'm completely clueless about the way we should present this feature
> to the user...
> 
> Matthias Elter said on irc that it'd be nice to configure this via dnd,
> in somehow through the view-frame.
Overkill;-) (see below)

> 
> I agree with him and I think the view-frame should/will play a certain
> role when configuring such bindings. However I have *no* idea how to
> "indicate" that one view is "master" and one is "slave" .
Well, weīd need a little icon. Quite little. Looks like a job for our
artists:-)
> 
> Well, one simple approach would be do have two kinds of icons, displayed
> somewhere in a corner of the titlebar. But this is tricky and probably
> pretty much confusing when having more that two views.
As long as you donīt have tons of views, Iīd say thatīs no Problem.

> 
> I also think that we might consider restricting this feature only to views
> which are next to each other (above/below/left/right) .
Thatīs IMHO not a good idea.
> 
> Hmmm, another idea comes to my mind:
> If we go for the above described restriction, then we could draw arrows,
> pointing to the view which "eats" all the url requests.
Uhh? Do you want to paint them into the titlebar? How would the user
know what is meant by these arrows?
> 
> But this properly works only for "horizontal" bindings, because of the
> horizontal splitters.
You want to draw them onto the Splitterbars? That would result in
veeeery small arrows.
> 
> Hmmm, yes, I'd like the arrows thingy, although the restriction to
> horizontal bindings is somewhat ugly, isn't it?
I soon recommit that splitting stuff(fully working this time; took a bit
longer than planned, as I was on vacation the last week) and then even
the horizontal thingy wonīt work anymore, I fear.

> 
> Perhaps someone has an idea how to indicate the view-follows-view feature
> for vertical bindings?
> Or perhaps someone has a completely better/new idea?
Well, my idea was(as I already told you) to give every view a state,
this can be either Master, Slave or None. We restrict it to one Master.
Otherwise it would be too confusing. But we can have several Slaves. All
views configured as Slave follow the view configured as Master. Views
with the state None are neutral. Slaves can further be switched in BiDir
mode. When in BiDir mode an URL opened in the Slave is opened in the
Master as well. This way views can follow each other, like old kfm did
when tree-follows-view was enabled. When a Slave is not in BiDir mode
selecting URLs in it has no effect on the Master.
So we would only need two buttons/icons in the FrameHeader:
Master/Slave/None and BiDir On/Off. No need for DnD.

Comments?

Greets

Michael

-- 
Michael Reiher  
     Student at Dresden University of Technology
          Department of Computer Science
               email: michael.reiher@gmx.de

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