From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D882FBDCB for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 19:47:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from web30510.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30510.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.123]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with SMTP id j7UHlv3u026438 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 19:47:58 +0200 Received: (qmail 99767 invoked by uid 60001); 30 Aug 2005 17:47:57 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=QFLisYue+KX0d3OwitI8F3Rtq+6qQxxxja48eN+q8wtqk0mDsCWGBS01OHml/cnX16FPJ6+iM9+uCcpzKHCoPwqdMxtAWiSVfna2W6qjFUXhjCf0iOq9kkBipT3Igl9I/Ld3SSSELwQI4yyZyOJpMVjH+4+Ghg2Gqpvv0lcrJw0= ; Message-ID: <20050830174757.99765.qmail@web30510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [141.213.12.136] by web30510.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:47:57 PDT Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:47:57 -0700 (PDT) From: David Thomas Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Does LablTk have a future? To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200508301445.08793.jon@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43149BCD.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 labltk:01 kde:01 macos:01 windowing:01 behaves:01 ...:98 pleasantly:98 wrote:01 abstract:01 native:02 native:02 behave:02 behave:02 configured:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.5 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 --- Jon Harrop wrote: > > And because you loose the ability to have native > > interface on all paltforms (Gnome, KDE, Windows 2k, > > Windows XP, MacOS X, ...). > > Yes but we gain the ability to have a better > interface on all platforms. While pleasantly egotistical, I would have to say that this is a false statement. Yes, there are problems with any given windowing system. Note, however, that the user has already chosen the system whose shortcomings they feel the most comfortable with. Additionally, they have likely already configured that system according to their personal preferences, which means that your application must either know about each individual system and poll it for each relevent setting, require the user to re-specify their preferences with respect to your application, or ignore the user's preferences altogether. Since this is something that virtually every application with a windowed GUI will likely be using, it should be done by a GUI library, rather than on an application-by-application basis. There's also the principle of least surprise. While your system may be better than theirs in the abstract, the best GUI behaves the way the user expects it to behave, and that means the same way that the user's other applications behave - hence, native look and feel when it doesn't conflict with other goals. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com