RE: Ease of use (was Call for constructive user criticism.)

[Steve Homer <shomer fmco com>]

I've a couple of questions regarding libglade (it sounds too good to be
true!)

Firstly can you confirm that the user interface is built at runtime from an
xml file containing the UI definition.

1) Can the user modify the user interface in a simple manner from a
graphical utility.

2) Could multiple UI's be supported selected via meta-data or a preference
or ....

3) How much flexibility is given in the modification of the UI.

4) How does Libglade deal with custom widgets as part of the UI.

5) What runtime penalty is incurred from a dynamic UI.

If dynamic UI is possible we should definitely push it as a core feature of
Gnome. Themeablity to point of the widget placement!!!!

Cheers,
Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: mawarkus@t-online.de [mailto:mawarkus@t-online.de]
Sent: 05 August 1999 23:38
To: gnome-list@gnome.org
Cc: "recipient.list.not.shown"
Subject: Re: Ease of use (was Call for constructive user criticism.)


+++ Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 02:57:43PM -0700 +++
Fox, Kevin M e-mails me. Film at 11. Reply right now, after the break.
> Actually, if libglade were to be used for all programs, you would make
your
> 2 interfaces with glade (much easier then hand coding by the way) and have
a
> simple if else statement in your main function to switch between the two
(or
> more) glade intervaces. Using libglade would make the program 100x
smaller,
> more flexable, and easier to code.  

But it would still mean redoing the interfaces of all the existing
programs with Glade.

Have you got the manpower to do it? Can you assure that libglade-built
interfaces have got all the necessary features?

mawa
-- 
Speaking for me, not for Microsoft.


Mainly because I don't work for Microsoft.


-- 
        FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
         To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
                       "unsubscribe" as the Subject.