On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 15:49 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 00:47 +0100, Alan Horkan wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Pat Suwalski wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > On the project I work on, Celestia, my goal is to have a UI that is > > > consistent with the Windows UI, so that it's literally a port. To that > > > end, some things follow the HIG (I have dialog buttons at the bottom of > > > the window as opposed to the side) > > > > Gtk add support for alternative button orders for just this kind of use > > case. It is at least possible to have it both ways if you want. > > Actually, that's not the point of alternate button order support; the > point of the alternate button ordering setting in GTK+ is to be able > to create a GTK+ application that runs in a Windows or KDE environment > and has button ordering consistent with the platform, including for > the standard dialogs where the buttons are created by GTK+, not by the > application. > > I would consider it in poor taste for an app running within the GNOME > desktop to switch to the alternate button order; users are going to > be quite confused if some GTK+ apps running within GNOME have different > button orders for the standard dialogs than others.
I think what Alan was saying was that GTK+ supports this so that applications can have Gnome button order under Gnome and Windows button order under Windows, so that Pat doesn't have to use Windows button order in Gnome (or vice versa). -- Shaun _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
