Re: RGSG - File Menu

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Wesley Felter <wesf@cs.utexas.edu>
To: gnome-gui-list@gnome.org <gnome-gui-list@gnome.org>
Date: Monday, August 03, 1998 7:41 PM
Subject: RE: RGSG - File Menu


>> I agree there should be a close all.  I also think there should be a
close
>> all and quit.
>
>If quitting closes all, then what's the difference between quit and close
all and quit?


Quit:  Close all things and quit.  One menu command.
Close All And Quit:  Close All things, sit around with nothing to do, have
the option of opening a file or making a new one or importing something or,
if you like, press quit.   Poof, quit.

>I think close all is definitely a good idea, but then there's a question of
how some apps would display themselves when they have no documents/files
open. (e.g. Some apps have a 1:1 correspondence between windows and
documents, so if there are no documents open then there are no windows open
and you can't see the app. This is tied to the issue of whether the app
should quit when its last window closes; if it does then there's no
difference between close all and quit. MacOS solves this by keeping the
app's menubar around even if it has no windows, but I don't know if that's a
good solution.)


I hate the macos menu solution.  Hate?  I misspelled despise, loathe, etc.
Worst part of the interface.

The Minbar deals with this quite nicely...all apps or windows thereof are
contained in a single "box" that can reside on the panel or anywhere else.
Go read the proposal at http://www.best.com/~effugas/ , I like it.

>(Sorry Dan, the first time I sent this I missed the list...)
>
>Wesley Felter - wesf@cs.utexas.edu - Hack the Planet
>
>
>--
>         To unsubscribe: mail gnome-gui-list-request@gnome.org with
>                       "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>
>