> I hope "declarative" doesn't end up meaning "screw abstraction, we'll > make everything as painfully concrete as possible" ;-). > > Actions are a nice way to declare a bunch of things that the user can > do, which can later be moved around by the view developer to different > presentation (toolbar / app menu / context menu / shortcut / tv remote > control / whatever). Compared to just exposing a method, Action can > have icon, (translated) text, status tip, etc...
And yet they bind the notions of "UIs are a bunch of commands" and "commands have static icons and test labels" into the design language of the user experience, while "abstracting" something that is trivial. Anyone trying to write applications by devising a traditional toolbar-menu-buttons UI and then expecting some magic "style" to be applied to their abstraction in order to make a pleasant UI is riding on the wrong bus. Start with the interaction design and the abstract logic engine, then bring the two together. Do not just add UI abstractions on the engine and expect success - that only "works" for SAP and Lotus Notes, and.... well, it doesn't actually work at all, does it? -- Warwick _______________________________________________ Qt-qml mailing list Qt-qml@trolltech.com http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-qml
