On 31/07/17 18:23, Jean-Philippe André wrote: > Hello, > > > I was talking with Sanghyeon last week and realized that our use of > Efl.Orientation (interface) and Efl.Orient (enum) for UI elements did not > actually make perfect sense: > > 1. UI objects tend to have a default direction which is more like > "downwards" or "to the right". Not UP (which is orientation 0) > > 2. UI objects tend to be either horizontal or vertical, not necessarily > right/left/up/down > > 3. The degree value (0, 90, 180, 270) is not necessarily meaningful as > we're not rotating the objects, just defining a general direction in which > they work. > > > Are there any objections into splitting Orientation (for images, video and > probably the window itself, ...) and something like Direction (for UI > widgets, like box, panes, etc...)? > > > TIA, >
Just remember for Right to Left languages UI elements that would normally be on the Left end up on the Right so left and right isn't really the best language either I think Qt uses something like Leading and Trailing for stuff that swaps properly for right to left and Left and Right if you wanted it fixed. I don't remember how well elm handles that though. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
