On May 14, 2007, at 15:46 UTC, Marc (aliacta.com) wrote:

> > Would we also require the ability to freeze some bottom rows and
> > rightmost columns?
> 
> I think the answer would be yes if you wanted to go all the way, but 
> I believe that the 'freezing' should be for people to implement  
> themselves.
> 
> As a rule of thumb, the more features you'd implement, the harder it 
> might get for people to do things that are not foreseen (e.g. current
> ListBox), whereas an 'empty' frame would leave all possibilities open.

I certainly agree with that in general.  However, if a feature is very
difficult to add on from the outside -- or difficult to implement at
all -- and it's something many people want, then it should be built in.
Otherwise the control is just too hard to use.

In this case, I'm having trouble imagining how people would add this
feature (locking some top/bottom rows and some left/right columns)
themselves if it weren't already built for it.

> > As for embedding of controls in a cell -- that one is really hard
> 
> It would be good to have at least the controls that are most used for
> databases, e.g. popup, checkbox, radio, canvas (for thumbnails),  
> etc.  And then each cell/control should be editable or not, enabled  
> or not.

Well, if you can embed a control at all, then you can control yourself
whether it's enabled, read-only, etc.  The hard part is getting it to
draw and interact properly with the user, while being embedded in a
complex dynamically-created scrollable space.

> There might be a default implementation for scrolling, but here too I
> feel developers might have such a variety of needs that fully  
> customized scrolling should be the rule.  (As an example, if you have
> a lot of columns or they're simply very wide, you might want some  
> form of horizontal scrolling that just skips a number of columns to  
> speed navigation up.)

I'm having trouble buying your example.  You could certainly control
the step size, but the scrollbar should (always!) map to the total
scrollable width, with a page size equal to the proportion of that
which is currently visible.  You don't speed up navigation by changing
this standard behavior.

[Re. making an open-source control of this sort:]

> That would certainly be very welcome.  I thought of doing this myself
> several times over the past years but never came to it because the  
> gruesome lack of time that governs many of people's lives,  
> unfortunately including mine.

Yes, too true.  I'd have think carefully about the cost and
justification and so on, but it may be doable.

Best,
- Joe

--
Joe Strout -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Strout Custom Solutions


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Reply via email to