Re: Requiring state to be shared in verb is not always correct

[otaylor redhat com]

"John Sullivan" <sullivan eazel com> writes:

> Hi Michael,
> 
> Currently Bonobo expects that items that share a callback via sharing a verb
> will also want to share state, sensitivity, and hidden-ness. If code tries
> to put those three attributes on an item rather than its verb, Bonobo emits
> a warning (though currently it continues to work despite the warning).
> 
> However, we've run into a case in Nautilus where sharing the state in the
> verb is not appropriate. Specifically, we have two ways to toggle between
> showing the URI text field and showing the search criterion UI. One way is a
> menu item that is not a checkmenuitem. It toggles between two words. The
> other way is a toggle button in the tool bar. Activating either of these two
> items does the same thing, so they should conceptually share a verb. But
> only the toggle button has "state" in the Bonobo sense. (The menu item does
> have state in the sense of its label changing, but the widget itself is not
> a state-full widget like a checkmenuitem would be.)

Perhaps there needs to be a concept of a dual-label menu item

 state 0 => Show URI field
 state 1 => Hide URI field

Because there _is_ state in this menu item, and if you had multiple
menu items for this verb, they should all coordinate.

(I assume the reason why you are avoiding the toggle button here
is you think it is clearer to say "show/hide" rather than
have 

 [ ] URI field

I'm somewhat, though not 100% not convinced of that, but I'm
definitely not convinved that handling this in different ways in two
different places is a good idea... anyways.)
 
Regards,
                                        Owen