Gary,
That was quick! I will certainly check it out. I am negligent in not yet finding your previous emails listing some assumptions about the image. Reasons aside, I had problems until I downloaded the Squeak-dev image, at which point implementors... etc. worked. I noted some problems with "lost clicks" but I assume that pre-dates your recent changes and/or is specific to 3.10.
Are there any tricks to updating that image to contain your new work?
As an aside, I am surprised you have put so much attention into look w/o worrying (much) about feel. If you don't mind describing it, who are your users? If not specifically, what type of tasks, what level of expertise? I am curious because I find it difficult to envision people who would be attracted by your appearance enhancements and not lost due to the feel problems.
THANKS!!!
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
gazzaguru2@btinternet.com 09/04/07 10:48 AM >>>
I have uploaded a new version of Widgets to SqueakSource. Hopefully adds "click to focus" functionality. Untested properly at the moment so holding off updating the Universe. Perhaps some brave people would like to have a go!
Two extra preferences added: mouseClickForKeyboardFocus and windowsActiveOnFirstClick. The first covers the changes for making the #mouseEnter behaviour (i.e take keyboard focus) optional for most basic morphs. The second, with a bit of a fix, allows the first click on an inactive window to properly propagate to the clicked morph after activating its containing window.
I find it a bit strange to have to assume "normal" behaviour with these options! (Have go used to the Squeaky/Motif way of focus handling, in a (using Squeak) modal way!).
Feedback always appreciated!
Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bill Schwab Sent: 02 September 2007 12:11 am To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: Re: [UI] What's next?
Brad,
Good point about the task bar - there are other solutions to that problem, but none as slick.
More generally, if you want to start with specifications, that is fine; count me in. I suspect they will be completely ignored, just as Squeak's deficiencies have been ignored. Whether by preferences or perhaps themed feel, we might have a chance to break through the "please don't break our toy" resistance by producing something nice enough that there will be some backlash against any who attempt to blackball it. For those who genuinely prefer the motif behavior, we should offer it from the beginning, but we should also provide a way to meet the demands of end users who have learned that they can freely "shove the mouse out of the way."
In short, however we get there, I think our ultimate product should be working code with enough appeal (and I think Gary has the basics to make it work) to get the average Squeaker (if there is such a person) to want it.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
bradallenfuller@yahoo.com 09/01/07 5:37 PM >>>
----- Original Message ---- From: Bill Schwab BSchwab@anest.ufl.edu To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Saturday, September 1, 2007 9:48:34 AM Subject: [UI] What's next?
Do any of you have any regrets about installing Gary's packages? I am tempted to load them into my working 3.9 image. Any reports of bad experience would be appreciated.
I haven't found a problem except the one I mentioned to Gary, and it must have been my fault, so no need to elaborate on my errs ;-)
Without any implied lack of gratitude, the changes are thus far simply
eye candy.
perhaps, with the excepttion of the taskbar at the bottom, which may be helpful to some for auto-arranging the desktop.
Gary's work is much appreciated and I can't wait until he finishes it!
As impressive and helpful as the changes are, I will stick to my
long-standing assertion that Squeak's real GUI problems are feel related.
I don't agree that it's exclusively feel related. There are many "look" issues as well. I contend that "look and feel" go hand-in-hand and maybe we should approach it this way?
Does this group want to tackle that problem?
YES!
How?
I still push the idea that we need guidelines first. But, i wanted to hear from more on this discussion topic before I said anything else (plus, I've been swamped too!)
Do we want to adopt Gary's work as a foundation?
Foundation for what?
I am tempted to vote in the affirmative on the latter, and hope that we will go further by taming the mouse-over activation and focus madness.
This could be easily remedied by first agreeing upon a keyboard focus rule(s) and then implementing the rule into the standard image (maybe for 3.10?.) With the rule in place, software authors will at least know what the rest of the community believes to be best practice. They can violate it if they want in their own apps, but at least it's stated.
Maybe this could be our first project.
Preferences are fine: I would not want to force convention on others any more than I want to subject my users to (what
would appear to them as) random behavior as they move the mouse.
Preferences settings has been a long standing feature in Squeak. Frankly, I don't know how good it is. I like it, but there are some good arguments against this (see Raskin.)
Gary's work is yet another illustration that native widgets are not necessary to achieve any particular look, and I am confident we can illustrate the same re feel.
Sorry, I always get confused on what "native" means. Does it mean native to the hosting OS, or native to Squeak? Maybe we should not use the word "native" and use "Host" or "OS" and "Squeak": e.g.: OS-widgets, Host-widgets; Squeak-widgets, Host-derived widgets -- ???
To comment on your comment, I believe that Squeak-derived widgets forces easy portability between hosts.
brad
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
There is quite a bit of feel in there too, just not obvious (tab/shift-tab field switching, Alt-left/right window switcher etc.). As for mouse over, I'd got used to it... Odd now it can be "normal"!
-----Original Message----- From: ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bill Schwab Sent: 04 September 2007 4:22 pm To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: RE: [UI] What's next?
Gary,
That was quick! I will certainly check it out. I am negligent in not yet finding your previous emails listing some assumptions about the image. Reasons aside, I had problems until I downloaded the Squeak-dev image, at which point implementors... etc. worked. I noted some problems with "lost clicks" but I assume that pre-dates your recent changes and/or is specific to 3.10.
Are there any tricks to updating that image to contain your new work?
As an aside, I am surprised you have put so much attention into look w/o worrying (much) about feel. If you don't mind describing it, who are your users? If not specifically, what type of tasks, what level of expertise? I am curious because I find it difficult to envision people who would be attracted by your appearance enhancements and not lost due to the feel problems.
THANKS!!!
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
gazzaguru2@btinternet.com 09/04/07 10:48 AM >>>
I have uploaded a new version of Widgets to SqueakSource. Hopefully adds "click to focus" functionality. Untested properly at the moment so holding off updating the Universe. Perhaps some brave people would like to have a go!
Two extra preferences added: mouseClickForKeyboardFocus and windowsActiveOnFirstClick. The first covers the changes for making the #mouseEnter behaviour (i.e take keyboard focus) optional for most basic morphs. The second, with a bit of a fix, allows the first click on an inactive window to properly propagate to the clicked morph after activating its containing window.
I find it a bit strange to have to assume "normal" behaviour with these options! (Have go used to the Squeaky/Motif way of focus handling, in a (using Squeak) modal way!).
Feedback always appreciated!
Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bill Schwab Sent: 02 September 2007 12:11 am To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: Re: [UI] What's next?
Brad,
Good point about the task bar - there are other solutions to that problem, but none as slick.
More generally, if you want to start with specifications, that is fine; count me in. I suspect they will be completely ignored, just as Squeak's deficiencies have been ignored. Whether by preferences or perhaps themed feel, we might have a chance to break through the "please don't break our toy" resistance by producing something nice enough that there will be some backlash against any who attempt to blackball it. For those who genuinely prefer the motif behavior, we should offer it from the beginning, but we should also provide a way to meet the demands of end users who have learned that they can freely "shove the mouse out of the way."
In short, however we get there, I think our ultimate product should be working code with enough appeal (and I think Gary has the basics to make it work) to get the average Squeaker (if there is such a person) to want it.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
bradallenfuller@yahoo.com 09/01/07 5:37 PM >>>
----- Original Message ---- From: Bill Schwab BSchwab@anest.ufl.edu To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Saturday, September 1, 2007 9:48:34 AM Subject: [UI] What's next?
Do any of you have any regrets about installing Gary's packages? I am tempted to load them into my working 3.9 image. Any reports of bad experience would be appreciated.
I haven't found a problem except the one I mentioned to Gary, and it must have been my fault, so no need to elaborate on my errs ;-)
Without any implied lack of gratitude, the changes are thus far simply
eye candy.
perhaps, with the excepttion of the taskbar at the bottom, which may be helpful to some for auto-arranging the desktop.
Gary's work is much appreciated and I can't wait until he finishes it!
As impressive and helpful as the changes are, I will stick to my
long-standing assertion that Squeak's real GUI problems are feel related.
I don't agree that it's exclusively feel related. There are many "look" issues as well. I contend that "look and feel" go hand-in-hand and maybe we should approach it this way?
Does this group want to tackle that problem?
YES!
How?
I still push the idea that we need guidelines first. But, i wanted to hear from more on this discussion topic before I said anything else (plus, I've been swamped too!)
Do we want to adopt Gary's work as a foundation?
Foundation for what?
I am tempted to vote in the affirmative on the latter, and hope that we will go further by taming the mouse-over activation and focus madness.
This could be easily remedied by first agreeing upon a keyboard focus rule(s) and then implementing the rule into the standard image (maybe for 3.10?.) With the rule in place, software authors will at least know what the rest of the community believes to be best practice. They can violate it if they want in their own apps, but at least it's stated.
Maybe this could be our first project.
Preferences are fine: I would not want to force convention on others any more than I want to subject my users to (what
would appear to them as) random behavior as they move the mouse.
Preferences settings has been a long standing feature in Squeak. Frankly, I don't know how good it is. I like it, but there are some good arguments against this (see Raskin.)
Gary's work is yet another illustration that native widgets are not necessary to achieve any particular look, and I am confident we can illustrate the same re feel.
Sorry, I always get confused on what "native" means. Does it mean native to the hosting OS, or native to Squeak? Maybe we should not use the word "native" and use "Host" or "OS" and "Squeak": e.g.: OS-widgets, Host-widgets; Squeak-widgets, Host-derived widgets -- ???
To comment on your comment, I believe that Squeak-derived widgets forces easy portability between hosts.
brad
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
As for users... Yet to be deployed to them (Report Builder)... Though I have done some work on "lock-down" to prevent unexpected menus etc in a deployed application.
For version, this has not been tested by myself with 3.10, just 3.9. I haven't noticed any "lost clicks" with scrollbars but then, they are timing/step based for the "page" areas...
-----Original Message----- From: ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bill Schwab Sent: 04 September 2007 4:22 pm To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: RE: [UI] What's next?
Gary,
That was quick! I will certainly check it out. I am negligent in not yet finding your previous emails listing some assumptions about the image. Reasons aside, I had problems until I downloaded the Squeak-dev image, at which point implementors... etc. worked. I noted some problems with "lost clicks" but I assume that pre-dates your recent changes and/or is specific to 3.10.
Are there any tricks to updating that image to contain your new work?
As an aside, I am surprised you have put so much attention into look w/o worrying (much) about feel. If you don't mind describing it, who are your users? If not specifically, what type of tasks, what level of expertise? I am curious because I find it difficult to envision people who would be attracted by your appearance enhancements and not lost due to the feel problems.
THANKS!!!
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
gazzaguru2@btinternet.com 09/04/07 10:48 AM >>>
I have uploaded a new version of Widgets to SqueakSource. Hopefully adds "click to focus" functionality. Untested properly at the moment so holding off updating the Universe. Perhaps some brave people would like to have a go!
Two extra preferences added: mouseClickForKeyboardFocus and windowsActiveOnFirstClick. The first covers the changes for making the #mouseEnter behaviour (i.e take keyboard focus) optional for most basic morphs. The second, with a bit of a fix, allows the first click on an inactive window to properly propagate to the clicked morph after activating its containing window.
I find it a bit strange to have to assume "normal" behaviour with these options! (Have go used to the Squeaky/Motif way of focus handling, in a (using Squeak) modal way!).
Feedback always appreciated!
Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:ui-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Bill Schwab Sent: 02 September 2007 12:11 am To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Subject: Re: [UI] What's next?
Brad,
Good point about the task bar - there are other solutions to that problem, but none as slick.
More generally, if you want to start with specifications, that is fine; count me in. I suspect they will be completely ignored, just as Squeak's deficiencies have been ignored. Whether by preferences or perhaps themed feel, we might have a chance to break through the "please don't break our toy" resistance by producing something nice enough that there will be some backlash against any who attempt to blackball it. For those who genuinely prefer the motif behavior, we should offer it from the beginning, but we should also provide a way to meet the demands of end users who have learned that they can freely "shove the mouse out of the way."
In short, however we get there, I think our ultimate product should be working code with enough appeal (and I think Gary has the basics to make it work) to get the average Squeaker (if there is such a person) to want it.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
bradallenfuller@yahoo.com 09/01/07 5:37 PM >>>
----- Original Message ---- From: Bill Schwab BSchwab@anest.ufl.edu To: ui@lists.squeakfoundation.org Sent: Saturday, September 1, 2007 9:48:34 AM Subject: [UI] What's next?
Do any of you have any regrets about installing Gary's packages? I am tempted to load them into my working 3.9 image. Any reports of bad experience would be appreciated.
I haven't found a problem except the one I mentioned to Gary, and it must have been my fault, so no need to elaborate on my errs ;-)
Without any implied lack of gratitude, the changes are thus far simply
eye candy.
perhaps, with the excepttion of the taskbar at the bottom, which may be helpful to some for auto-arranging the desktop.
Gary's work is much appreciated and I can't wait until he finishes it!
As impressive and helpful as the changes are, I will stick to my
long-standing assertion that Squeak's real GUI problems are feel related.
I don't agree that it's exclusively feel related. There are many "look" issues as well. I contend that "look and feel" go hand-in-hand and maybe we should approach it this way?
Does this group want to tackle that problem?
YES!
How?
I still push the idea that we need guidelines first. But, i wanted to hear from more on this discussion topic before I said anything else (plus, I've been swamped too!)
Do we want to adopt Gary's work as a foundation?
Foundation for what?
I am tempted to vote in the affirmative on the latter, and hope that we will go further by taming the mouse-over activation and focus madness.
This could be easily remedied by first agreeing upon a keyboard focus rule(s) and then implementing the rule into the standard image (maybe for 3.10?.) With the rule in place, software authors will at least know what the rest of the community believes to be best practice. They can violate it if they want in their own apps, but at least it's stated.
Maybe this could be our first project.
Preferences are fine: I would not want to force convention on others any more than I want to subject my users to (what
would appear to them as) random behavior as they move the mouse.
Preferences settings has been a long standing feature in Squeak. Frankly, I don't know how good it is. I like it, but there are some good arguments against this (see Raskin.)
Gary's work is yet another illustration that native widgets are not necessary to achieve any particular look, and I am confident we can illustrate the same re feel.
Sorry, I always get confused on what "native" means. Does it mean native to the hosting OS, or native to Squeak? Maybe we should not use the word "native" and use "Host" or "OS" and "Squeak": e.g.: OS-widgets, Host-widgets; Squeak-widgets, Host-derived widgets -- ???
To comment on your comment, I believe that Squeak-derived widgets forces easy portability between hosts.
brad
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui