On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 02:30:59PM -0400, Keith Mastin wrote: > >It could be argued that getting a better UI is worth the cost of losing > >console access. That is a legitimate tradeoff, and its worth exploring > >whether it is a tradeoff that Dieter wants to make. > > There are a lot of programs out there that have already done this... > console accessibility is one of the major features that made sql-ledger so > attractive to me.
[snip] That's fine. I'm not personally arguing either way, I'm just suggesting that there is an argument to be made. I realise its a lot of work, but it is possible to have two interfaces. In fact, since sql-ledger is open source, if any javascript wizards out their feel like building a new UI over the top of Dieter's engine, that might be a workable solution. -- Steven D'Aprano Operations Manager Cybersource Pty Ltd, ACN 053 904 082 Level 9, 140 Queen St, Melbourne VIC 3000 Tel: +61 3 9642 5997 Fax: +61 3 96425998 Web: http://www.cyber.com.au ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 ------------------------------------------------------- (un)subscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
