> > You keep saying that - but I haven't seen a shread of support. WHAT IS > > WRONG WITH SIMON'S IDEA? > It does not address the issue of redundancy.
You can keep repeating that as much as you like, it won't make it true! A few emails back I outlined exactly how I think this should be implemented based on Simon's original idea. WHY WON'T THAT WORK?! What information will that not show that a newbie would want to see? > What about retries? You'll have to move blocks that need to be retried > to the right hand extreme, so why not go with the scheme I suggested in > the other mail (involving a fixed box, and successes are one contiguous > block filled from the left, and permanent failures are filled from the > right). :) Don't be a total idiot. You don't need to draw each block individually, rather you split the bar up into several components (4 in my proposal IIRC), each representing the number of blocks in each of the 4 states I outlined. > > It will use JavaScript, but will fail gracefully if it isn't present. > Ugh. Blech. Gerbleghl. Best argument you have made all day. Ian. -- Ian Clarke ian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.com] Latest Project http://cematics.com/kanzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021219/cccb91c2/attachment.pgp>
