Re: Sizing...

[Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com>]

----- Message Text -----

Hi Maciej

On 26 Jul 2000, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> This sounds like you are implying that Controls should be
> self-scrolling (if they need scrolling), while Embeddables should be
> scrolled externally. Am I understanding correctly?

        That is broadly correct; certainly there is no problem whatsoever 
with controls having scrolable contents of whatever type, a control is
simply a rich embedded widget.

> If so, I see at least one problem that you didn't already cite below.
> 
> * Now you need both a control and an embeddable for each mime type,
> because a different one is appropriate depending on your use-case.
  
        We currently have this anyway except both are embeddables which
sucks for the user. However, as discussed I want a more generic way of
solving the problem without 'control'ling everything. 
 
> >     I have answers for none of these criticisms
> > I just made them up and I'm tired. The more I look at
> > it the more it seems that we want a different interface
> > than just a plain 'set zoom' on the View for 'scaled'
> > components, whereas the 'set zoom' suffices for 'non
> > scaled' components ( see above for examples ).
>
> I don't see how `set zoom' suffices for anything if you can't see the
> size, or know if the thing is generating it's own scrollbars, or
> anything.
 
        When I say components here I mean embeddables, sorry about the
terminology confusion. Set zoom is vital since it is possible to zoom into
a workbook, at which point you want to expand the bounds of the embedded
word document and still see the same amount of it; ie. you need to set its
zoom factor. I find it hard to follow your logic in this paragraph. Who
sees what ? why should it generate its own scrollbars without being told
to in some way ?

        Regards,
          
                Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks@gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot