From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,3b9d131e799185e3
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!212.101.4.254.MISMATCH!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!newsfeed.tiscali.ch!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:21:02 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: gnat gps
References: <a93q55l553urs2mk51bv1jha37bhter1pr@4ax.com>
 <h3kr2g$fjo$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>
 <QpydnY-ogekzLMPXnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In-Reply-To: <QpydnY-ogekzLMPXnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4a5eff0e$0$32678$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Jul 2009 12:21:03 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 13669c8b.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=4\nLe`Pb\Wg[F<50eo:0knA9EHlD;3Ycb4Fo<]lROoRa^YC2XCjHcbi0DWemF[Lill;9OJDO8_SKfNSZ1n^B98ijO1MWF;4ZF9k
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7081
Date: 2009-07-16T12:21:03+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dennis Lee Bieber schrieb:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:02:40 +0000 (UTC), Peter Hermann <spam@spam.de>
> declaimed the following in comp.lang.ada:
> 
>> There seems to be no way to reach the bottom of a window
>> when the upper-left corner does not offer shrinking capability.
> 
> 	So far as I've experienced, all applications that do allow resize
> from top/left will redraw the contents /from top\left/, so reducing the
> size will never help.
> 
> 	Personally -- I'd blame the problem on the push to get "netbooks"

Isn't it rather the missing separation of style and content
that makes important dialogue windows unusable?  Programmers
may realize that it's in their hands to add controls to
dialogue windows that works within 614400 pixel squares no
matter what arrangement the smart graphical OS software chooses,
provided they are made aware of this opportunity.

Unless, of course, computer users be prevented from freely
choosing their preferred window appearance.

A programmer's "works for me" attitude that makes him/her
fix the size of a dialogue windows dismisses that
essential separation of content (buttons, input fiels, ...)
and style (size, color, ...).

Yes, the size of screens is no longer <= 480 pixels, vertically,
as it used to be. But wait, it still is nearly this size, today,
on most popular cell phone computers! How did the loop guys
manage to make usable dialogues on a sceen this small?
There mus be something wrong, then, in

(a) visual design tools and libraries and
(b) programmer education.




> (something I know of as being initially designed for minimal "local"
> applications, meant to be used as an Internet access device and not as a
> full up computer)

Uhm, browsing the WWW is not really a "local" application?
Also, it's the WWW and "web design" that require larger screens.