Re: the UML ClassDialog v/s the generic Dia properties dialog

[Lars Ræder Clausen <lars raeder dk>]

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 19:25 +0530, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe wrote:
> On 11/20/08, Lars RÃder Clausen <lars raeder dk> wrote:
>
> > > dialog, only three things are relevant to Dia, the diagram app:
> > >
> > > Text Color
> > > Foreground Color
> > > Background Color
> >
> > I would posit everything under the "Style" tab, plus the wrapping
> > widths.
>
> Ok. Whatever "makes sense" in terms of Dia. In a loose sense that
> means anything that has to do with appearance (layout, colours,
> groupings, connections, etc) in a generic way.
>
> > Why shouldn't the UML object follow the style of the Flowchart Box and
> > allow editing of its contents in-diagram? Having two different dialogs
> > would introduce a new (third) way to edit contents. Things that cannot
> > be written directly can be modifiable via the context menu -- which can
> > be built dynamically based on what part of the object is being pressed.
>
> This goes into the domain of usability ... the best way to edit UML
> content might need some more thinking, and I have not given any
> thought to that. My purpose here is to get that specialised properties
> dialog out of the way, in order to clear the way for bug fixes related
> to the properties dialog. But for now, I think I might be able to get
> my fixes in without affecting the current behaviour. If that doesn't
> work, the current UML properties dialog just might need a separate
> method of invocation instead of the current double click.

Basically, there's a lot of the "properties" in the UML class that are
really content that you'd rarely if ever want to change at the same time
on multiple objects.  A quick hack would be to exclude the UML class
from multi-object property change?  Or exclude those strange
"content-like properties"?  Don't know what your fixes are, but a kludge
around the UML class could do for now.

-Lars