Re: non inplace components (was: DDJ article) (long !!)

[Nat Friedman <nat nat org>]

Mlacage@aol.com writes:
 > Dans un courrier daté du 03/11/1999 00:35:41 Paris, Madrid, nat@nat.org a 
 > écrit :
 > 
 > > 
 > >      I don't think I agree with this part.  I think a GnomeEmbeddable
 > >  can have multiple views, some of them in-place, some of them
 > >  non-inplace.  What do you think?
 > >  
 > 
 > Well, this strikes me.... To me, the REAL use of noninplace activation is as 
 > folows:
 > it is used only for ease of development: when pl begin to write their 
 > components, they begin by developping noninplace components then they add 
 > inplace ability, then saving/linking....
 > The point is that non-inplace is not an end in itself but rather a step which 
 > eases the development. You can test your component sooner.

    I can see how it would be useful to test your component without
implementing the in-place code.  But I still that that non-in-place
component views need to be well-supported.

 > Anyway, I jsu can't figure out what could be the use of a componnent which 
 > would be both inplace and noninplace.

    I can see it being useful.  Imagine the following scenario: You
embed an image in your word processor document.  And you want to edit
it, but at a higher zoom level.  So you create a non-in-place view of
the component at a higher zoom.  It opens in a separate window and
edits in that window are reflected in the in-place subdocument.

Shrug.

Nat