From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 References: <201107121631.05140.dexen.devries@gmail.com> <20110712155612.5b174266@lahti.ethans.dre.am> <201107121726.29100.dexen.devries@gmail.com> <4E1DA117.2030307@0x6a.com> <1310566566.1696.48.camel@Wes-Toshiba-Laptop> From: Anthony Sorace Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1310566566.1696.48.camel@Wes-Toshiba-Laptop> Message-Id: <18A0ABD5-F005-4295-B279-4789A728736D@9srv.net> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:45:38 -0400 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8J2) Subject: Re: [9fans] interesting(?) widgets idea Topicbox-Message-UUID: 01069204-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Jul 13, 2011, at 10:16, Wes Kussmaul wrote: > Isn't this a perfect case for letting the user set a parameter, > depending upon his/her preference? No. The choice is between two very different user interaction models. Nobody= has claimed that having widgets filling what would otherwise be margins and= having them *not* fade would be a good plan. It'd be like setting a paramet= er to determine whether your editor acted like sam or acme - just pick which= to run, instead. I'm surprised and a bit disappointed that with all the talk I've seen on thi= s topic over the years there haven't been more actual experiments (rio -i be= ing the most ambitious I can think of). The rio code is nice to work with - p= ick it apart and get hacking.