danielv at netvision.net.il wrote:
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Hultgren?= <goran.hultgren at bluefish.se> wrote:
> > Good point. I was thinking of adding a "pseudo category" called "[all packages]"
> > or something. Would that be good? If we keep it on the top it would work almost
> > as the "all" does in method categories.
> Sure, that's good.
> BTW, the actual package list has very few lines. Maybe you should lay
> things out differently. For example, sub categories pane under
> categories pane, no sub-sub-categories (or much smaller), and pacakge
> list pane on the upper right, taking up 0.66 at 0.5 of the window?

Yes, I am not completely happy with the current layout. It is inspired
by the way of the TrailBlazer browser from good old VisualAge Smalltalk.
Since the category panes can "dig down" I think I want three of them to
make the position in the tree more apparent. Granted the category tree
isn't that deep yet - but I hope/expect it will become larger and
deeper.

I was also intending to have a search UI below the panes where you can
enter keywords for text search (using Scott's engine) and be able to
select categories for filtering.

regards, Göran