r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3 GUI]

Pekr
11-Mar-2011
[6759x7]
I have problem accepting result of examples:

15, 23, 24, 25, 26, and I stop here, probably many others ...


The problem I see is,that I don''t want elements to jump during resizing 
the way it does. Please try form example 15. IMO if we don't support 
scaling, the text and its spacing should not change at all. I would 
expect panel being enlarged, but all it does is the panel moves down, 
and GUI creates space between the header text and the consecutive 
text.


Also - look at example 26 - why the last line of boxes is shifted 
down the window from all the rest of the boxes?
And you thought, I might like following coder, right? :-)

 view [hpanel [button button button] options [box-model: 'frame]]
If we can't come up with something better (which is beyond my imagination 
and the "proper" way would require to come up with xy alternate names 
for all panel/group combinations), I am definitely at least not sure 
about the facet (property) name. Does drawing the surounding frame 
(or simply parametrisation of one of style visual) has anything to 
do with the term "box model"?


I would probably use draw-mode name, but not sure it would not be 
confused with draw frames then? What do you think? Forget the syntax, 
we can't do any better here imo, but what about the name?
Align examples - I don't understand the align+halign at all. Why 
the vertical coordinates of red and blue boxes are reversed?
Also - please use halign instead of allignt, to be consistent with 
hpanel, vpanel, etc. It has imo no sense to name one property valign, 
and the other one align.
as some things might get lost in the discussion, I am really thinking 
about putting some of above stuff into CC. Please add Rebolek the 
right to edit tickets status.
Panel example #35 - I just wonder, how many ppl will feel lost the 
same way as I feel. The naming terms in regards to results are difficult 
for me to resolve. As for alignment, there is several way of how 
to name things:

halign, valing


left , right, center (vleft, vright, vcenter, hleft, hright, hcenter)


left, right, center, top, middle, bottom (or the corner alignment 
-  top-left, top-right, buttom-left, bottom-right - if those would 
be used, I would immediatelly understand it)


But - let's try to think about it a bit - we have some alignements 
in various GUI levels. If possible, let's stay consistent (e.g. it 
is enough that low-level text handling uses MS Word like terms, which 
don't relate to the rest of the gui)
Rebolek
12-Mar-2011
[6766x3]
re 15) text-resizing was enabled, so DOC-browser can render documents 
properly, but it seems that it doesn't sem max-size properly. I will 
check it.
ALIGN, VALIGN - this is same naming as in HTML, so you can expect 
most people be familiar with it.
box-model facet name - what about FRAME? name: none, frame: 'simple, 
frame: 'fillet etc
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6769x2]
frame name works better for me than box-model, although it suggests 
a bit - frame - yes or no? frame-type would be more descriptive, 
but longer. I would be ok with frame, frame-type (mode), draw-mode 
- all better than box-mode imo ....
as for alignment - from html I do remember align="left | right | 
center" .....
Henrik
12-Mar-2011
[6771]
I would go for EDGE, like VID, if you are to implement such a feature.
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6772x2]
alignemnt - really - go to example #35, write down all variants on 
paper, forget the visual representation you are provided with, and 
just draw it on the paper out from your head. I bet you will make 
a mistake. And align + valign is not understandable for me at all 
....
Henrik - whatever name might work. As for EDGE - this is yet another 
term though. EDGE was regular facet in VID though, and in R3 it is 
replaced by BORDER, no?
Henrik
12-Mar-2011
[6774]
I think the edge/frame/border usage is a little confusing. EDGE was 
a standard feature for every face in VID and it was fixed how it 
worked. In R3, an edge would be implemented on the DRAW level and 
could basically mean anything, including what it means in relation 
to the box model. This is why I'm still advocating a special FRAME 
style, which in *one* place, settles the meaning and the appearance.


Furthermore, a FRAME could be required for any type of face, be it 
a form with many fields, a compound of faces or groups of compounds 
of faces, which need to be surrounded by a pixel accurate frame, 
like in the example below, which I had trouble defining properly, 
when I experimented with skinning:

http://94.145.78.91/files/r3/gui/162.png


I had problems with it, because it had to be part of COMPOUND, and 
yet, certain COMPOUNDs would not have a frame and certain other panel 
types would also require the frame, but not be a compound. It is 
just much simpler to have it in a separate style.
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6775x2]
but how would you define, what layout engine should be used? We have 
two, no? panel, and group ... and their respective vertical vs horizontal 
variants ...
The question is, if we can please all users. Some will like borderless, 
backgroundless clean style. Some might want frame around the panel, 
and I can imagine users wanting just a bit different color or gradient 
to distinguish the panel from the surrounding.
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6777x2]
#[[Pekr

Does drawing the surounding frame (or simply parametrisation of one 
of style visual) has anything to do with the term "box model"?

Pekr]] - surely it does, the box model specifies that, and other 
properties
#[[Pekr
frame name works better for me than box-model

Pekr]] - it does not for us, since that way, you would be limited 
only to one of the box-model aspects
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6779]
Ladislav - I know, but imagine user will just want above mentioned 
variant - panel, which will be distinguished by a bit brighter bg 
color, not a drawn frame.
Henrik
12-Mar-2011
[6780]
Pekr, by only allowing a single face (with any number of subfaces) 
inside such a frame style, layout would not be an issue.
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6781x3]
What do you mean by box model aspects? margin, border, padding, content?
Henrik - aha, so you mean that FRAME would be special face type allowing 
to create various surroudings upone certain face? So that it would 
containt panel, or group? That might work ...
But of course then - we have altready those facilities for all faces 
- a box model, where's the space to draw any borders,etc. Well, we 
could say then, that FRAME is special decorative kind of style. The 
question is, if it would not be overused by uesrs, putting even buttons 
inside of FRAME, to have a decoration? :-)
Henrik
12-Mar-2011
[6784]
Pekr, "That might work" - precisely. :-)
Rebolek
12-Mar-2011
[6785]
You don't need special enclosing face if you can use box-model for 
it and draw in the border.
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6786]
Ladislav - box model/frame is not much of an issue for me. I think 
that worse problem for me is how currently resizing is behaving in 
above mentioned styles, and all that align examples and its naming 
- very confusing.
Rebolek
12-Mar-2011
[6787]
align and valign are pretty standard names if you've ever seen HTML, 
what's so confusing about them?
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6788]
#[[Pekr
And align + valign is not understandable for me at all ....

Pekr]] - right you are, you should see the code to understand what 
the text means. In short, it means, that the HALIGN and VALIGN properties 
are set somehow, instead of using the default values, that are 'LEFT 
+ 'TOP
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6789x3]
everything. Have YOU ever seen  html?
as I said - in html align = left | right | center ...
can you please explain to me, why the align + valign aligns left 
red box vertically in reverse position than signle align?
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6792x3]
err, I meant: "ALIGN and VALIGN are set somehow, instead of using 
the default LEFT + TOP setting"
ALIGN + VALIGN does nothing
their values do
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6795]
aha, now I look into the code - makes much more sense now. Then it 
is about the description in the demo, which confused me
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6796]
ALIGN can be: LEFT CENTER RIGHT
Rebolek
12-Mar-2011
[6797]
as opposed to left right center... ;)
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6798]
It is in the documentation
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6799x2]
ok, my question towards the align, valign. I know we might want to 
be "compatible" to html, but to stay consistent - we have vpanel, 
and hpanel, not vpanel and panel. Wouldn't it be wise to use valign, 
halign too?
ok, got to go. So the only yet unexplained part to me is that of 
a resizing. As Rebolek hinted, it might be caused by the text being 
resized. It is just, that with examples I mentioned, the result is 
(of course IMO) not a desired one.
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6801]
Regarding Henrik's FRAME note - that is a surprise for me, never 
heard about such a proposal, and disagree with it.
Pekr
12-Mar-2011
[6802x2]
E.g. try also panels-26.r3 - why the last line of boxes stays "attached" 
to the bottomof the window, causing a space?
If you will say, that it is explainable by how the resizing model 
works, then I might reshape the question and ask how to avoid it?
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6804]
#[[Pekr

I think that worse problem for me is how currently resizing is behaving 
in above mentioned styles

Pekr]] - resizing is behaving as it should. The problem is just that 
Bolek specified that the vertical size of the text is "unlimited" 
for resizing purposes. That is causing the layout to look ugly.
Henrik
12-Mar-2011
[6805]
Ladislav, I discussed it a few days ago, but not to worry. Rebolek 
disagrees too, so it probably won't be done. My worry is that the 
act of creating a border or frame around a style will be an obscure 
part of a base style.
Ladislav
12-Mar-2011
[6806x3]
#[[Pekr

E.g. try also panels-26.r3 - why the last line of boxes stays "attached" 
to the bottomof the window, causing a space?

Pekr]] - that is an example "inherited" from Carl, and it behaves 
as it should, taking into account, how it was defined. You need to 
take a look at the code
#[[GiuseppeC

I have ran the latest RE-GUI and the examples. I have see that when 
the CHECK is off the "v" is still visible but greyed.

GiuseppeC]] - you are not the only one who dislikes this. Count me 
in.
#[[Henrik

My worry is that the act of creating a border or frame around a style 
will be an obscure part of a base style.
Henrik]] - you need not worry, it already works for all styles