On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 01:34:12PM -0400, Eric S. Johansson wrote: > On 7/21/2012 1:22 PM, Richard wrote: > >I do not think it would be possible to take just the GUI of either > >of those and add it to mutt. My ideal xmutt would be much lighter, > >my feature list is as * mouse * font support, text drawing > >directly in X or pango might be much simpler than UTF over curses > >in xterm * some goodies like sidebars which are too hairy to do > >with curses
Why not enable mouse support in xterm and do something like: alias xmutt='xterm -e mutt' > In the accessibility world, I operate on the principle that > accessibility is defined by what the user needs, not what the > developer gives. This means that it must be possible to customize > the user interface to the point of completely rewriting it if that's > what the user needs. I'm not saying it should be easy, just it > should be possible. The natural way to do that is to provide an API > to the application and isolate the user interface elements in > separate processes/modules/whatever. Althought there's no common API that's shared between "all" application, you just described something similair to the MVC[1] concept that's a design pattern for software. Computer scientists in my hometown love it, engineers in my hometown don't... You can also debate that this is already done with libraries and applications, where an application only is an interface for the library. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-View-Controller -- Med vänliga hälsningar Fredrik Gustafsson tel: 0733-608274 e-post: iv...@iveqy.com
