On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Graham Cox <graham....@bigpond.com> wrote:
> OK understand, but why, when NSView does it for you using 
> -scaleUnitSquareToSize:?

Because it makes drawing things consistently at 1:1 resolution easier.

> Agree, if you always draw the resize handles at the same fixed size. However, 
> I found that usability was improved noticeably when these elements are 
> allowed to scale, but only in some smaller proportion of the main zoom 
> factor. For example, I use 33% of the main zoom as the scale factor for 
> resize handles, except if the view is zoomed out in which case a limit is 
> applied so that the handles do not become smaller than a certain size. 
> There's also a limit applied at the upper end as well. This makes sense for 
> general graphic manipulation, though possibly not for every conceivable case 
> however (e.g. I don't use focus rings as a highlighting method for "content").

I could see small/normal/large resize handles... I think Graffle makes
the resize handles smaller when the object itself is small (due to
geometry or zoom). But that's different from blithely drawing the
resize handles at whatever scale AppKit has calculated for you.

> I guess it's not going to make a huge difference whether you apply your own 
> transform to the "content" drawing or let NSView do it, the content gets 
> drawn correctly either way. However, if you do handle your own transform, 
> doesn't the ruler scaling management become really painful? I'm just asking - 
> I haven't tried this approach so I haven't explored what you have to do with 
> the rulers to make this work.

My preferred solution: ditch NSRulerView. :)

--Kyle Sluder
_______________________________________________

Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)

Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com

Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Reply via email to