Hi, again, Carl, On Thursday, June 20, 2002, at 10:02 PM, Carl Read wrote:
> >> - Why do windows need to be scalable? > > Because if not, your average programmer assumes everyone has a > 1024x768 display or better... > Yow! Any programmer who would make such an assumption (or assume that everybody is running a particular browser, or has millions of colors, or a 1.2 GHz processor, or ...) needs some professional experience (unless, of course, (s)he is working in a closed environment where all resources are centrally controlled. > >> - What problem are we really solving? > > Different sized displays - from 320x200 (cell-phones and the like) > upwards... > YMMV; but my experience is that when I'm designing a palm-top-sized display, I'll want to lay out a screen in a totally different way that I would for a desktop-/laptop-sized screen. Of course, that's just me... > Because sometimes the same window will have different amounts of > content. Text in an area is an obvious example. It's nicer to avoid > scrolling if you can, and enlarging the window can do that in some > cases. > That assumes that making the window larger keeps the font sizes the same. It seems to me that sometimes that would be the desired effect, but that sometimes one would like the fonts to scale up with the window. Just an observation that we have one more moving part here. > >> Although I now have to point out that you are assuming TWO new >> types: a percent! type, and a percent-pair! type. Scope creep rears >> its ugly head once again! ;-) > > Actually, I was just thinking of a modified pair. Pair was added with > pixel coordinates in mind I believe, hence it only accepts integers, > not numbers. So adding percentage support shouldn't break any > existing scripts. (He guessed wildly:) > But IIRC the two elements of a pair are defined as integral. Having a "modified pair" that has non-integral elements sounds like a different data type to me. -jn- -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
