Re: A Violent Realisation [Was: Preferences]
- From: "Trever L. Adams" <tadams-lists myrealbox com>
- To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- Cc: Duncan Mak <duncan ximian com>, iain <iain ximian com>, Dick Porter <dick ximian com>, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: A Violent Realisation [Was: Preferences]
- Date: 29 Apr 2002 22:55:44 -0700
On Mon, 2002-04-29 at 12:59, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> And again, that's the ONLY feature that is intrinsic to viewports.
>
> So what you have there is a list of features that should be decided on
> individually, case-by-case, but none of them imply anything about
> desktops vs. viewports. ;-)
>
> Havoc
>
As I tried to say, I don't care semantics, so long as functionality is
there, works, works well and consumes only the resouces that are
necessary or reasonable beyond that.
I guess my question, as I am getting a little lost, since I don't know
the terms very well (I prefer lower level programming where there really
isn't a UI) is this: Viewports are the one going out or are desktops?
Which allows windows to be half in one and the other?
Anyway, as I said, the only feature I don't care to much about is this
one, though I do make use of it from time to time, I don't like it as
much.
Thank you for responding and for being patient with me.
Trever Adams
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]