On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 03:10:54 +0100, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > >It's two different problems that happen to map to similar data structures. > > > > so what's against supplying one solution to two problems? > > They are different, and require different solutions. > Functionality : one is essential, the other mostly decorative. > Implementation: one is simple, the other will become more complex as you > go a bit deeper into it.
I can see that scale points might be more complex, but they are just as vital. > - Is a host required to provide exactly the value you specify at a scale > point on a slider, or is it allowed to supply the value corresponding to > the pixel position of the scale point ? > - For the integer 'switch', it's not so difficult to design a widget that > will handle all reasonable string lengths. For a slider with tick marks > this is already less evident. A reasonable implementation might be for a <whatever enumerated ui> + a slider, picking from the enumerated control jumps the slider, moving the slider could clear the enumeration control or set it to the nearest value. > - Maybe you want to specify the physical position of the scale points as > well, either to solve the above problem, or to have something more subtle > than the LIN / LOG choice we have now. Hmm... yes, these are related issues (both are annotations of specific control values), but they can be seperated. - Steve
