On 19 Jun 2002 13:54:05 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 02:30:53PM -0400, parv wrote:
> > in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > wrote fvwm-workers thusly...
> > >
> > > I'm not quite happy with the tear-off menu code yet:
> > >
> > > - Torn off menus have a strange focus policy.
> > > - There is no good way to handle tear off menus with the mouse.
> > > - Placement and sizing of the menus is not perfect.
> > >
> > > What do others think about tear-off menus? What should be done?
> > > How can we improve usability? Are there other issues I missed?
First, tear menus are great.
Of course they should be implemented as a module not to cause problems,
but until then the current implementation solves most of the needs.
My problems. I am not sure MenuStyle should not be allowed when a tear
off menu is on the screen. This forces a user (or fvwm-themes) to close
all tear off menus first (that may be on different desks) and only then
switch menustyle. It would be nice if there was no such limit. When
there was a bug with a usage counter recently, MenuStyle was allowed
before a tear off menu is closed for the first time. It looked not very
perfect (font changed when you point to an item), but it was acceptable.
Is it possible to just automatically recapture all affected tear offs
after MenuStyle is changed?
Another issue, I think the top menu title should be separated using
("" TearMenuOff), not ("" Nop) separator. Then mouse 2 binding on a title
may be removed.
And finally. It would be nice to document tear offs and TearMenuOff.
> > other problem is when the torn off menu (window) is placed on two
> > pages, the menu doesn't behave like it does w/ "Animation" style
> > when there is no enough space to fit the whole menu (in non-torn
> > off mode). i would expect the menu to slide on focus such that it
> > is appears in its entirety on the current page. (that could be your
> > 3d point.)
>
> Ah, I see. Hadn't thought of that yet. Animated tear-off menus
> are really not a good idea.
I think animations in tear-offs work well. I don't think anything should
be changed. When a user placed a window between 2 pages, he wants it to be
there. But probably I just don't understand the problem, it works for me
as expected with or without animation.
> > pressing "escape" on torn off menu's window title doesn't make it
> > disappear, only on the actual menu (items).
>
> Should it? Closing tear-off menus should be more difficult that
> closing normal menus so that you don't close them accidentally.
> To deactivate the menu, simply move the mouse away. What do
> others think of this?
I agree about making it harder to be close. I am not even sure that
Escape on items should close a tear off, but it may,
> Well, to sum it up, I can think of at least three features that
> do not work well with tear-off menus:
>
> - menu animation
> - continuation menus ("more...")
> - sub menus
>
> I don't see a good solution for either of these, except
> recommending not to use any of these features with tear-off menus.
Hmm, really, "More..." does not work now in tear-off menus.
Is it possible to get a decoration height into account when creating
continuation menus as Dan previously suggested?
As for menu animation and sub menus I don't see a problem.
Regards,
Mikhael.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
