From what worked in FLTK2, I don't think we want or need per-class styles.

All customization I have seen involved changing the Widget style (the 
base class) and the 2 or 3 per-class ones who's only reason for 
existence was that the default values were different. I suggest this be 
fixed by making more fields in the base class so all widgets can share 
the same one.

It really is not very useful to change all the numeric text editors to a 
different color. What users want is to change *all* the text fields to a 
different color. As FLTK1/2 are designed these do not come off a common 
base class, so it was much better to put the field in the Widget base.

Other than colors, almost all the rest of desired customization involves 
changing the graphics drawn for buttons and scrollbars. FLTK1/2's 
attempt to do this with the box types did not really work well, as it 
would tend to replace only part of an FLTK application. I think a better 
approach would be to have a function the user can replace that takes the 
box type (which remains an integer) as an argument. For 
back-compatibility there will be a bunch of redundant box types (thin, 
thick, shiny, etc) but any new theme can just treat these all 
identically. Maybe shiny can be eliminated as it really is a theme.

It would be VERY useful to get some information on the GTK theming api, 
the KDE theming api, and on the Windows Appearance api. Any new design 
HAS to be able to call these, so if the fields don't match then it is 
going to be difficult!
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to