Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
Locked
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
 
|
here is my summary
fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) based on fame you can load and save model. Magritte is a meta data driven framework. you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: > Hi, > > being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. > There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? > > For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). > > Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. > > Any info on this would be appreciated. > > Thanks. > > Francois > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ?
Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. What do you think ? Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : > here is my summary > fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) > based on fame you can load and save model. > > Magritte is a meta data driven framework. > you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. > > On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >> >> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >> >> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >> >> Any info on this would be appreciated. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Francois >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote: > Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ? I do not know what is your scenario? > Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. do you have an example? because you mean describing Magritte in fame? > Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) fame already support the functionality of EMF. I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel. > I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. > > What do you think ? I do not know. what is your need? Stef > > Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : > >> here is my summary >> fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) >> based on fame you can load and save model. >> >> Magritte is a meta data driven framework. >> you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. >> >> On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >>> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >>> >>> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >>> >>> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >>> >>> Any info on this would be appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Francois >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
Hi,
Such a bridge is useful when you want to use the tools built on top of the other meta-meta-model. For example, in Metanool I started to work on an editor for the Fame descriptions. To do this, we have a translator of Fame objects into Magritte objects (hacked with Lukas on some train ride). The code is available at: "Metanool" Gofer new squeaksource: 'Metanool'; package: 'Metanool'; load. The most interesting method is: FM3MetaDescription>>asMagritteDescription Cheers, Doru On 25 Sep 2010, at 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote: > >> Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ? > > I do not know what is your scenario? > >> Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. > > do you have an example? > because you mean describing Magritte in fame? > >> Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) > > fame already support the functionality of EMF. > I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel. > > >> I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. >> >> What do you think ? > > I do not know. what is your need? > > Stef > >> >> Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : >> >>> here is my summary >>> fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) >>> based on fame you can load and save model. >>> >>> Magritte is a meta data driven framework. >>> you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. >>> >>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >>>> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >>>> >>>> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >>>> >>>> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >>>> >>>> Any info on this would be appreciated. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Francois >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com "Relationships are of two kinds: those we choose and those that happen. They both matter." _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Le 25 sept. 2010 à 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : > > On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote: > >> Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ? > > I do not know what is your scenario? I would like to edit models in the web browser with seaside components generated with Magritte and save the models using Fame. > >> Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. > > do you have an example? > because you mean describing Magritte in fame? I am just wondering why I must use two languages to describe a metamodel with constraints. If I want to express a language structure I must use Fame (to have package, classes, properties). If I want to add constraints I must use Magritte. But when I define Magritte descriptions, I feel like I rewrite the same stuff I did in Fame (except for the validation part). > >> Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) > > fame already support the functionality of EMF. > I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel. > Yes, but it is still missing editing tools compared to EMF, or am I wrong ? > >> I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. >> >> What do you think ? > > I do not know. what is your need? I want to describe a language only one time and be able to use tools from Fame and Magritte. So with a minimal amount of work, I get serialization, edition, validation, code generation. > > Stef > >> >> Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : >> >>> here is my summary >>> fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) >>> based on fame you can load and save model. >>> >>> Magritte is a meta data driven framework. >>> you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. >>> >>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >>>> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >>>> >>>> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >>>> >>>> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >>>> >>>> Any info on this would be appreciated. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Francois >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba
Doru, you got my point.
Thanks for the link, I will have a close look at it. Le 25 sept. 2010 à 22:18, Tudor Girba a écrit : > Hi, > > Such a bridge is useful when you want to use the tools built on top of the other meta-meta-model. For example, in Metanool I started to work on an editor for the Fame descriptions. To do this, we have a translator of Fame objects into Magritte objects (hacked with Lukas on some train ride). The code is available at: > > "Metanool" > Gofer new > squeaksource: 'Metanool'; > package: 'Metanool'; > load. > > The most interesting method is: > FM3MetaDescription>>asMagritteDescription > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 25 Sep 2010, at 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> >> On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote: >> >>> Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ? >> >> I do not know what is your scenario? >> >>> Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. >> >> do you have an example? >> because you mean describing Magritte in fame? >> >>> Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) >> >> fame already support the functionality of EMF. >> I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel. >> >> >>> I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. >>> >>> What do you think ? >> >> I do not know. what is your need? >> >> Stef >> >>> >>> Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : >>> >>>> here is my summary >>>> fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) >>>> based on fame you can load and save model. >>>> >>>> Magritte is a meta data driven framework. >>>> you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. >>>> >>>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >>>>> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >>>>> >>>>> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >>>>> >>>>> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >>>>> >>>>> Any info on this would be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Francois >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Relationships are of two kinds: those we choose and those that happen. They both matter." > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Ok I see your point.
What would be nice is to see how you could have fame and the core of Magritte merged so that we can use Fame and Magritte could be build/described using Fame this way we could use Fame serialization for famix but also magritte So may be this is the time to have Magritte 3 based on pragmas and using Fame/magritte core as Magritte3 Core Stef > > Le 25 sept. 2010 à 21:50, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : > >> >> On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:20 PM, François Tanguy wrote: >> >>> Would it be a good idea to have a bridge between the two ? >> >> I do not know what is your scenario? > > I would like to edit models in the web browser with seaside components generated with Magritte and save the models using Fame. > >> >>> Like generating magritte descriptions from the Fame pragmas. >> >> do you have an example? >> because you mean describing Magritte in fame? > > I am just wondering why I must use two languages to describe a metamodel with constraints. > If I want to express a language structure I must use Fame (to have package, classes, properties). > If I want to add constraints I must use Magritte. > But when I define Magritte descriptions, I feel like I rewrite the same stuff I did in Fame (except for the validation part). > >> >>> Then we could imagine to have a generic editor for a metamodel and serialization... (like in EMF) >> >> fame already support the functionality of EMF. >> I think that Fame should stay a simple metametamodel. >> > > Yes, but it is still missing editing tools compared to EMF, or am I wrong ? > >> >>> I wrote a very basic piece of code that does the transformation from Fame to Magritte in some very specific use case and that is something that is definitely possible. >>> >>> What do you think ? >> >> I do not know. what is your need? > > I want to describe a language only one time and be able to use tools from Fame and Magritte. > So with a minimal amount of work, I get serialization, edition, validation, code generation. > >> >> Stef >> >>> >>> Le 25 sept. 2010 à 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse a écrit : >>> >>>> here is my summary >>>> fame is a minimal meta meta model ( 4 or 5 classes): we use it describe other model (such as Famix) >>>> based on fame you can load and save model. >>>> >>>> Magritte is a meta data driven framework. >>>> you describe specific entity and the tools interpret it. >>>> >>>> On Sep 25, 2010, at 11:24 AM, François Tanguy wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. >>>>> There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? >>>>> >>>>> For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). >>>>> >>>>> Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. >>>>> >>>>> Any info on this would be appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Francois >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: [Pharo-project] Fame vs Magritte
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
I'm preparing the doc about metamodeling in Moose using Fame, but that's using the regular code browser en refactoring browser. Right now there are some consistency validation of metamodel described in Lint rules. So there is place for a UI editor + validation. On 25 sept. 2010, at 11:24, François Tanguy wrote: > Hi, > > being a end user, I am bit confused with these 2 frameworks: Fame and Magritte. > There are both meta-meta-models. So what make them different from a conceptual point of view ? > > For my models, I would like to have the persistency for free (from Fame) and the UI edition and model validation for free (from Magritte). > > Today I must write two times the description of my language (one in Fame and one in Magritte), and it feels like I would need only one description. > > Any info on this would be appreciated. > > Thanks. > > Francois > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- Simon _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. -- Simon _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
Hi,
Indeed, I forgot to announce that. The textual menu was moved in the window menu (the icon on the top right). Cheers, Doru On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:01, Simon Denier wrote: > > With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) > > Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. > > -- > Simon > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
In reply to this post by Simon Denier-3
On 27 sept. 2010, at 11:21, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi, > > Indeed, I forgot to announce that. The textual menu was moved in the window menu (the icon on the top right). ah ok :) I never use that menu, and I'm not sure other people takes a look at it. Actually I have a different expectation for this bytton: its common behaviour on MacOs is to hide/show the toolbar. So is it a wise choice? > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:01, Simon Denier wrote: > >> >> With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) >> >> Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. >> >> -- >> Simon >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- Simon _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
If you use the GLMUITheme, you will see a nice down arrow.
Doru On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:47, Simon Denier wrote: > > On 27 sept. 2010, at 11:21, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Indeed, I forgot to announce that. The textual menu was moved in the window menu (the icon on the top right). > > > ah ok :) > > I never use that menu, and I'm not sure other people takes a look at it. Actually I have a different expectation for this bytton: its common behaviour on MacOs is to hide/show the toolbar. So is it a wise choice? > > >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:01, Simon Denier wrote: >> >>> >>> With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) >>> >>> Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. >>> >>> -- >>> Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > Simon > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow." _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
In reply to this post by Simon Denier-3
On 27 sept. 2010, at 12:04, Tudor Girba wrote: > If you use the GLMUITheme, you will see a nice down arrow. Yes but :) 1) I don't like the Glamorous theme, sorry 2) and I still think it does not work, as the arrow is at the level of the window buttons, not at the toolbar level for actions - so it's not a place someone would go easily to look for actions. > > Doru > > > > On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:47, Simon Denier wrote: > >> >> On 27 sept. 2010, at 11:21, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Indeed, I forgot to announce that. The textual menu was moved in the window menu (the icon on the top right). >> >> >> ah ok :) >> >> I never use that menu, and I'm not sure other people takes a look at it. Actually I have a different expectation for this bytton: its common behaviour on MacOs is to hide/show the toolbar. So is it a wise choice? >> >> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:01, Simon Denier wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) >>>> >>>> Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Simon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> -- >> Simon >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow." > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- Simon _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: Can't see the menu in latest Glamour
|
|
Hi Simon,
On 27 Sep 2010, at 13:20, Simon Denier wrote: > > On 27 sept. 2010, at 12:04, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> If you use the GLMUITheme, you will see a nice down arrow. > > > Yes but :) > 1) I don't like the Glamorous theme, sorry You do not have to like it :). It's just that the renderer works better with that particular theme. > 2) and I still think it does not work, as the arrow is at the level of the window buttons, not at the toolbar level for actions - so it's not a place someone would go easily to look for actions. Well, I think it does :), but: - first, I would like to not promote textual actions - second, you will get those kind of arrows attached to every pane/tab, like you now have in the Seaside renderer, so you will get used to looking for them. Hopefully, we could make it to always have the arrow at the same level as the name of the tab (like with the Eclipse tabs), so it will be consistent everywhere. Cheers, Doru > > >> >> Doru >> >> >> >> On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:47, Simon Denier wrote: >> >>> >>> On 27 sept. 2010, at 11:21, Tudor Girba wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Indeed, I forgot to announce that. The textual menu was moved in the window menu (the icon on the top right). >>> >>> >>> ah ok :) >>> >>> I never use that menu, and I'm not sure other people takes a look at it. Actually I have a different expectation for this bytton: its common behaviour on MacOs is to hide/show the toolbar. So is it a wise choice? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>> On 27 Sep 2010, at 11:01, Simon Denier wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> With the latest update of Glamour, I don't have anymore the toolbar menu entitled '...' with the iconless actions. (in MoosePanel and the MetaBrowser) >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, I didn't have time to check deeper. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>> >>> -- >>> Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow." >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > Simon > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com "It's not how it is, it is how we see it." _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
«
Return to Moose
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |