John Levon wrote: > On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 06:01:37PM +0900, Rob Lahaye wrote: > >> *) 4 tabs instead of 5 >> *) items are rearranged to different locations. > > > I don't see these as problems.
In my opinion this breaks the idea of GUII. >> *) etc. etc. > > please elaborate ;) Okay. I wasn't sure my complaints were appropriate. I'll report whenever I have time to dig into comparing the frontends. (I'm not using Qt for my daily work, since quite some items are still missing, such as math panel, preferences etc.) > The intention is to write UI that doesn't NEED documenting. Indeed! But practically, there still will be a manual and reference guide etc. It would be horrible if Xforms and Qt need their own versions, because they are not compatible. >>I believe this is a very wrong point of view and GUII will cause more >>confusion than good for the users and documentation maintainers. > > Alas for you, but you're not writing the code and UI :) Argh, don't talk Microsoft language :(. >>The frontend's look&feel may be different, but items should be in exactly >>the same dialog, > > Like I said, it's up to the xforms people to play catch up. Well, do the xforms people agree? Is Qt indeed the UI default going-to-be and all other frontends should follow the Qt layout. Or is the underlying plan to abandon Xforms completely as soon as Qt is fully implemented? Rob.
