On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 10:30:29 +0000 Ian Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
(B
(B> (I was going to post this via the bugtrack system, but it wouldn't let
(B> me create an account <sad />)
(B
(B1. we aren't even FOLLOWING bugs for e17 right now. i sure am not. why? 99% are
(Bbugs about incomplete features or known issues. we don't want to trawl through
(Bsuch stuff at this stage. we only want reports once we have our own already
(Bexisting bug/incomplete feature lists empty :)
(B
(B> Anyway, there are a couple of features I'd like to see included in
(B> E17... (and, yes, I realise it's in a pre-release/heavy-development
(B> phase)
(B>
(B> 1) A virtual desktop and Pager ala SunOS:
(B> the desktop is something like 4800x3600, but a window of 1600x1200
(B> (or whatever) is
(B> displayed. The mouse should probably respect the boundries of the
(B> window, but I'm
(B> open on that thought. The pager does several things:
(B> a) If you put the mouse over a frame, then the frame enlarges so you
(B> can get an idea
(B> of what the real program actually is
(B> b) If you click on a frame, the window re-centers, with the selected
(B> window centered (or
(B> as close to centered as as is possible, given the edge of the
(B> desktop and the window
(B> will allow)
(B> c) If you click on the background (of the pager), then the window
(B> centers as above
(B> d) If you click and drag a frame in the pager, you can move the real
(B> frame on the
(B> desktop (as the E16 pager allows)
(B
(Bbasically the e16 pager does a lot of this already - though its limited to
(Blooking at the virtual desktop in whole-screen units only. this made it MUCH
(Beasier. we plan on doing that in future as it is much simpler to deal with and
(Bmuch less complex for users. we plan on implementing maybe a system that is
(Bsimilar to e16's virtual desktops/pagers but much slicker/cleaner. at this stage
(Bvirtual desktops alone are a bit of a ways off.
(B
(B> 2) A login interface that is similar to the Mac OS-X one: in that you
(B> can disengage one
(B> user from the screen'n'keyboard, and allow another user to log in.
(B> This is
(B> advantageous in that all the programs that are running for the first
(B> user continue to
(B> run, however the person at the console has no access to them. It's a
(B> bit like having
(B> multiple virtual x-consoles, but the consoles are protected.
(B> Oh, and the OS-X cube is *way* cool, in the way that the desktop
(B> shrinks back, and
(B> then rotates to give you a login form, and then spins round to give
(B> you your own
(B> x-console when you log back in....
(B
(Bthe problem is - how SECURE do you want it? it'd be possible to do this IF you
(Bwere happy to know that user A's apps can go kill off use B's and vice-versa.
(Bthey can copy and paste, play, do all sorts of things as they would SHARE the
(Bsame xserver and in x - once you are connected, the world is your oyster, if you
(Bknow what to do.
(B
(Bif security is no issue - then sure. its not too hard. if it is.. you will need
(Ba complete 2nd xserver.
(B
(Bbasically at this stage this is var off the todo list - so far for now it'll be
(Bdiscounted :) you're sending feature requests to people who still don't have
(Bvirtual desktop at all, don't have minimise, shade, maximise or even the basics
(Bof ICCCM and management and window focusing done properly yet :)
(B
(Bwe appreciate the sentiments and enthusiasm - but no point looking at this until
(Bwe have the basics back.
(B
(B> --
(B> Ian Stuart, Perl Laghu. EDINA, Edinburgh University.
(B> +----------------------------------------------------------------+
(B> | This is a signature. It is either a statement defining the |
(B> | scope of the message (and thus an attempt to indemnify the |
(B> | sender from any misunderstanding), or is some witty comment |
(B> | designed to show how much of a sophisticate the sender is (or |
(B> | isn't) |
(B> | In practise this is the bit you ignore. This has to be here |
(B> | for you to ignore it, for that's what ignore means: |
(B> | Pronunciation: ig-'nOr, -'nor Function: transitive verb |
(B> | 1 : to refuse to take notice of. |
(B> | 2 : to reject (a bill of indictment) as ungrounded |
(B> +----------------------------------------------------------------+
(B> | Works web site: http://edina.ac.uk/ |
(B> | Personal web site: http://lucas.ucs.ed.ac.uk/ |
(B> +----------------------------------------------------------------+
(B>
(B>
(B>
(B> -------------------------------------------------------
(B> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
(B> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
(B> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
(B> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
(B> _______________________________________________
(B> enlightenment-devel mailing list
(B> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(B> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
(B>
(B
(B
(B--
(B------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
(BThe Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
$BMg9%B?(B [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(BTokyo, Japan ($BEl5~(B $BF|K\(B)
(B
(B
(B-------------------------------------------------------
(BSF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
(BRead honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
(BDiscover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
(Bhttp://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
(B_______________________________________________
(Benlightenment-devel mailing list
([EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Bhttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
