[squeak-dev] World menu versus docking bar

Casey Ransberger casey.obrien.r at gmail.com
Mon Mar 29 05:30:10 UTC 2010


Totally. One thing I really would like to see, is a world menu with less at
the top level. I like to Squeak on a very small screen. I have an Eee
1005HAB, which is the spitting image of a DynaBook. It's a bit like an XO
but with a conventional display, conventional networking, enough muscle to
do serious development, and a keyboard big enough for my grown-up hands.

The top level world menu, presently, barely fits vertically.

I'd like to do a couple of things with it. I'd like e.g. help to contain the
same stuff as what's in the docking bar help menu, and accomplish that via
the same code path (Chris I think you're dead on here.) I'd also like to
move some things off of the top level.

One thought I had (people, please shoot me down if this is ridiculous to
you, I'm not sure I've sold myself on it) is: If the docking bar is enabled,
don't show the menus that appear on the docking bar in the world menu. If
the docking bar is disabled, the world menu can show it's contents. Yay?
Nay? Keep in mind this refers to a hypothetical world menu that shared an
implementation style with the docking bar.

I've been messing with the world menu since I first started playing with
Squeak, and having had a look at how the new docking bar is implemented (I
*really* like the implementation better) I would quite like to spend some
time rethinking the design of the world menu; I'm not sure I'd want to put
the effort in if I was the only person who'd ever use the code though, so
I'd like to get a sense of what people think about it.

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it'd be great to give the world menu a make-over..  Having
> separate menus for the docking bar and world could be "richer"..
> Maybe the docking bar could be just a sub-set of the world menu,
> because there are a lot of things that are not on the docking bar,
> right?
>
> I think it's great when we can simplify (e.g., try to improve the
> system by removal, not addition) the system while at the same time
> striving to make it more conventional for newcomers.  The challenge is
> to do it in a way that increases, or at least matches, existing
> functionality and usability..  For example, right now I'm able to
> navigate the world menu with the keyboard; I wouldn't want to lose
> that..  :)
>
> Thanks,
>   Chris
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Casey Ransberger
> <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Awhile ago we added a docking bar, because the world menu is often harder
> > for newcomers to find at first than we tend to want to think. We put some
> > key use cases there, most key of which is Help, which is probably more
> > important to newcomers than experienced users.
> > I noticed that the help... entry in the world menu contained some stuff
> that
> > was very questionably help-related, moved it out to the docking bar. I
> > pretty much emptied out the help... item on the world menu, so I removed
> but
> > Chris pointed out that not everyone uses the docking bar and put it right
> > back, suggesting that we find a way to generate the same menu in both
> > contexts (which I think is a great idea, and will investigate today.)
> > The question in my mind though, is: where do we stop with that? What do
> > people think: should there be any separation of concerns between the
> world
> > menu and the docking bar? (My thought was, some things made more sense on
> > the docking bar than the cluttered world menu, but if not everyone uses
> the
> > docking bar... yeah.) Or are the world menu and the docking bar best
> serving
> > the user as two different views into the exact same functionality?
> > From an implementation perspective, I much prefer the canvas-ish style of
> > what's in the docking bar presently. The data-driven style of the world
> > menu, while very terse, makes my eyes glaze over. I'm tempted to rip into
> it
> > and and refactor it to use a canvas-ish API (making the two more
> > compatible,) but I'm liable to introduce regressions that way, and we're
> > fairly locked down at present, no?
> > Anyway, I was hoping to get a feel for what people think about this
> stuff.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100328/6275490e/attachment.htm


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list