Sorry for being potentially rude. It's fairly ironic that I would talk about
this stuff given that I'm by no means authoritative for what is and isn't
appropriate here.
It's my understanding, however, that just anything isn't an appropriate topic
for conversation relating to what would be the
On 8/23/2011 11:42 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Sorry for being potentially rude. It's fairly ironic that I would talk about
this stuff given that I'm by no means authoritative for what is and isn't
appropriate here.
It's my understanding, however, that just anything isn't an appropriate topic
On 8/24/2011 1:00 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Hi,
On 24/08/2011, at 5:36 PM, BGB wrote:
ok, yeah, this is a little awkward, as my way of seeing things I
think tends to be a little more here and now, like the pink plane
in the video linked to with Alan talking about things (started trying
to
On 24.08.2011, at 09:17, BGB wrote:
either way, which color is which is probably not a critical issue...
We need to use a common language though.
but, I think this was a reference to Apple, which AFAIK had done things like
this:
Blue=features which can be done now;
Pink=features which may
You might find 'Software Integrated Circuits' and such interesting.
I've worked with one such implementation (based on
http://valleyofglen.com/SGlen_Chippery_Disseration.doc) and although we managed
to deliver software with it, including a 'mobile charging platform' for a large
telecoms
FWIW, the notion of 'game engine as platform' for UI is certainly worth
exploring. And a lot of good UI concepts can be taken from games.
I like the idea of users having an 'inventory' of objects that determine the
context for context-menus, for example. Sort of: if you see a door, the
options
On 8/24/2011 7:47 AM, David Barbour wrote:
FWIW, the notion of 'game engine as platform' for UI is certainly
worth exploring. And a lot of good UI concepts can be taken from games.
I like the idea of users having an 'inventory' of objects that
determine the context for context-menus, for
