W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Comments on View Modes

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:19:36 +0200
Message-ID: <v2yb21a10671004120419jef23e3eft1df24b7ee7ebf4ed@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Cc: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen@gmail.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 2010, at 14:58 , Kenneth Rohde Christiansen wrote:
>> I believe the 'all' is is not that useful as that is the same as not
>> declaring anything. This comment has been given by others.
>
> I've removed it.
>
>> The 'application' mode doesn't sounds like a view mode but more like a
>> state. Suggestions could be 'windowed' or maybe 'standalone'.
>
> I've changed application to windowed, pending implementer feedback (notably from Opera).

I can live with it (I have to admit its better than application).

>> But
>> maybe instead we should go for something like: "docked", "floating",
>> "minimized", "normal" and "maximized". Those really seem like view
>> modes to me.
>
> I'm guessing from the above that you'd rename "windowed" to "normal"? I don't think that's a very good name, there's nothing particularly normal about it (I run almost everything full screen despite OSX being quite amazingly bad at such a simple task).
>
> What's docked meant to be?
>
>> The mode "minimized" might seem useless at first, but I added for completeness.
>
> When minimised I might want to convey information through my icon alone — that's useful.
>
> --
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 12 April 2010 11:20:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT