From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Scrollbar bug on OS X Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:05:22 +0900 Message-ID: References: <87vf70ausz.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <5b72982df8c370d3a58358de397046c8@gmail.com> <86583cd4c0fa9cf9e4a562be66bb3a55@gmail.com> Reply-To: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, miles@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1112926471 32304 80.91.229.2 (8 Apr 2005 02:14:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 02:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: miles@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 08 04:14:29 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DJj0Z-0003rp-O1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 04:14:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DJiZz-0004Co-Ga for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:46:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DJiY1-00023B-20 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:44:37 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DJiXm-0001x3-AL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:44:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DJiXl-0001qX-KN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:44:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [64.233.184.198] (helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DJisr-00055g-Po for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 22:06:10 -0400 Original-Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 40so615182wri for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:05:22 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=TAV2Ivv+g6zcUV0PetEvDop+Dd+/JyhNHeSDkXJDFf9Qg+jKWQtscR2cMr71tXWqoCoTYIyDYqVbR4dUChTVlz3nEW8B/Aas9Prur+BfajyA0QrFI7Im1Lkd9dYLJ+e1snbGub5mnfiUh+BN5Ut8hxLiyrMc7979eK9vSNIh6vA= Original-Received: by 10.54.17.6 with SMTP id 6mr1258987wrq; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.54.19.32 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Apr 2005 19:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: David Reitter In-Reply-To: <86583cd4c0fa9cf9e4a562be66bb3a55@gmail.com> X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:35730 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:35730 On Apr 8, 2005 4:59 AM, David Reitter wrote: > Users exert their freedom to chose a particular UI environment. GTK can > be seen as part of an environment, as it creates compatible behavior > across applications. As mentioned earlier in this thread, UI is more > than the pretty visual image of a widget - it's the behavior that > counts. Yeah, well as a user, I'm always a bit miffed by the all-or-nothing attitudes of many GUI zealots. As a user, I know that I choose an "environment" like GTK/Gnome because I like the way it behaves/looks _on average_ better than other choices. None-the-less, there are very often things I dislike about it, and I'm very appreciative when the GUI developer had the foresight to allow me to override his defaults (however well considered they are). It's great to provide defaults that match expectations of the majority, but die-hard dogmatism in the name of the "users" is not great at all. > Consistency is extremely important. Consistent _defaults_, and guidelines that encourage consistent behavior are good things; consistency at all costs often causes more damage than good. > while I think that this > commonly used scrollbar behavior is actually consistent with the > document/window metaphor put forward in most modern windowing > environments since the mid-80's (which implies no over-scrolling) Er, how exactly does the "document/window metaphor" imply no over-scrolling? It seems more a case of "gee maybe users will get confused if their document is scrolled too much ... let's prevent it!" (which is all fine and good, but it's merely a practical heuristic). > Instead, suffice it to say that it should be up to > the UI layer to implement the exact behavior. The UI layer should be able to specify defaults; the final decision should be up to the user. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.