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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,578bd4d051bc4686
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-18 07:22:45 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!priapus.visi.com!orange.octanews.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!news.octanews.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!feed.news.tiscali.de!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail
From: Preben Randhol <randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@pvv.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: OT: GUI [was:]Ann: TeXCAD 4.1
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:22:44 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: PVV
Message-ID: 
 <slrnc5jfm3.aaf.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
References: <40577688.2A8B9832@fakeaddress.nil>
 <slrnc5g6lg.3ie.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <c39l9r$np7$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <slrnc5gmvi.7m8.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <c3a4vp$cgh$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <slrnc5h6la.cbq.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <c3bv60$kcj$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <mailman.106.1079609883.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <c3ccek$eb6$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: k-083152.nt.ntnu.no
X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1079623364 9051 129.241.83.152 (18 Mar 2004
 15:22:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:22:44 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6410
Date: 2004-03-18T15:22:44+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2004-03-18, Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote:
>
> Well, irrelevant..., the OP had mentioned or implied, to me at least,
> that low level layers (below Gtk) as well as the high level layers 
> invite criticism that can be well expressed in typical "Ada" terms.

What do you mean? I really don't understand what you are saying.

You said: That one should bring GtkAda up to the level of Mac OS X.

Then you go on comparing apples and oranges.

> Thinking about a new interface it is an opportunity to think differently
> about interfaces, taking human interface research into consideration.
> Interestingly this maps to programming language syntax design decisions,
> as presented in a collection of articles entitled "The Psychology of
> Programming" (I don't have it here, but I can provide details when
> I'm at home.)

Please I don't want yet another debate about Human interface. Rather
read : http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/

and give me a link to apples whitepaper on this.

> (For example, is a dashboard oriented panel design, as is more or
> less hardcoded in (the spirit of) Gtk(Ada) really an adequate choice
> when in comes to applications that have nothing to do with engineering,
> or with engineers?)

What do you mean?

> In addition, the new Gtk has adopted an XML based mechanism to
> describe certain interface components. This is another level of 
> abstraction. Dr. Leif might be pleased to hear about this ;-)

Are you talking about libglade?


-- 
Preben Randhol -------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/

()  "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent"
/\                                   - Isaac Asimov