On Tuesday 17 May 2011 19:33:15 Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 17. Mai 2011, 19:03:41 schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> > A Tuesday, May 17, 2011, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
> > > @all: please keep the emotions out of this thread and be constructive. I
> > > offered a possible solution for th
Am Dienstag, 17. Mai 2011, 19:03:41 schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
> A Tuesday, May 17, 2011, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
> > @all: please keep the emotions out of this thread and be constructive. I
> > offered a possible solution for the "problem" yesterday and nobody seems
> > to be interested in act
A Tuesday, May 17, 2011, Martin Gräßlin va escriure:
> @all: please keep the emotions out of this thread and be constructive. I
> offered a possible solution for the "problem" yesterday and nobody seems
> to be interested in actually improving the situation, instead it seems
> like some serious dis
@all: please keep the emotions out of this thread and be constructive. I
offered a possible
solution for the "problem" yesterday and nobody seems to be interested in
actually improving
the situation, instead it seems like some serious discussion for the sake of
discussion is
going on. This is
> I do not claim that the splitter situation you mention is an example of
> great usability, but i do claim that you're fighting the wrong problem
> here.
> You simply should not run into misclicks. If it happens too often and it's
> not about your input device, than the UI element needs improvemen
Am 17.05.2011, 14:47 Uhr, schrieb Michael Jansen :
> So you do not consider it breaking the usability
That was NOT the criticized claim.
It was "Until then you BREAK code" - a statement which has so far not
seen any proof.
> and take random 1 or 2 pixel wide rows/columns and turn them into a
>
> Heard that argument over and over again, but seen no proof at all (while i
> know about one issue, which -see below- was/is usercode bug.)
> I've checked the oxygen code and it is pretty careful to not steal any
> input action.
So you do not consider it breaking the usability of an application
Right after you point to the ones that contra-indicate it.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Christophe Giboudeaux
wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 May 2011 09:00:10 Hugo Pereira Da Costa wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> [...]
> >
> > Some of the reasons justifying the feature have actually already been
> > discussed in
Am 17.05.2011, 13:00 Uhr, schrieb Michael Jansen :
>> > . As an example all dockwidget using applications (Kontact, Kmail,
>> > kdevelop, dolphin, konqueror ... ) where you drag the application
>> > instead of resizing the docks if you are just one pixel off.
> ...
> Her is the first list of appli
On 05/17/2011 01:57 PM, Christophe Giboudeaux wrote:
On Tuesday 17 May 2011 09:00:10 Hugo Pereira Da Costa wrote:
Hi,
[...]
Some of the reasons justifying the feature have actually already been
discussed in this thread (by Martin), but must have been lost in
translations:
- it fits perfectly
On Tuesday 17 May 2011 09:00:10 Hugo Pereira Da Costa wrote:
Hi,
[...]
>
> Some of the reasons justifying the feature have actually already been
> discussed in this thread (by Martin), but must have been lost in
> translations:
>
> - it fits perfectly within oxygen, which makes no distinction b
> > . As an example all dockwidget using applications (Kontact, Kmail,
> > kdevelop, dolphin, konqueror ... ) where you drag the application
> > instead of
> > resizing the docks if you are just one pixel off. Resize it depending
> > on its
> > state and sometimes move it by a hundred or more pixe
On 05/17/2011 08:29 AM, Hugo Pereira Da Costa wrote:
> Let me sum up before i go back and contemplate the change of culture
> in kde.
>
>> Ultimately, I believe that the decision about what the default settings
>> for Oxygen's "window drag" feature is Nuno (who designs oxygen) and me
>> (who de
13 matches
Mail list logo
