Re: [GUI] Opinion summary.

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 06:41:55PM +0100, Nick Name wrote:

On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 17:12:54 +0000 Axel Simon wrote:

...

Oh no, the point should be: If you use the Common API you will (automatically) get applications which have a native look-and-feel.

I think there is a more tecnical aspect to discuss and that perhaps could be added to the summary if people agree. Yes, indeed. I am indeed lagging with my document since this technical discussion has already started. But before we define the details, we should probably define the core of the library (Yahu / Object I/O approaches) and then discuss:

Macos X has a notion of "application" and one of "document", and when one closes the last window of an application, the application is still running. On windows, OTOH, it's (at least it was) common pratice not to open a second instance of an application, but a new document instead, for every run of the program. On linux, there is the well known behaviour of creating a new unix process, and a new instance of the application, for every execution of the program. a) the SDI/MDI/NDI problem which Krasimir has raised on Jan 28

[..]

To get back on what I was talking about, if we want the common API to achieve real look and feel, we ought to have an "application" abstraction, wich is different from the "window" one. So an application could behave really different in any OS. On OSX, the menus of the documents of the same application will have to be in a submenu of the main menu for the application, and items like "exit" wich are not in the file menu (at least, I think I have heard so :)) need to be part of the "application" abstraction, as do the common items wich are found in the "help" menu. b) the application startup that enforces one menu bar and c) default menu entries (Exit on Windows, Quit on Mac - but the same thing in the Common GUI API)

I will try to keep up with the discussion! Axel.