9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] panning or scrolling, page(1)
Date: Mon,  5 Mar 2001 10:10:11 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010305011044.485B6199E4@mail.cse.psu.edu> (raw)

>I strongly prefer the panning model to the scrolling model. 

Yes, I had thought you'd done it already, which made me hesitate to open
this discussion.  ^_^

>  Are you really asking for
>some indication of what part of the image is visible?  

yes, I do, for images we are dealing with.  Let's think of a Mars Global Surveyor 
image, which usually has a very vertically long rectangular size, say such that
1024x5632.   In such case, we can never see it in a window, but only in some
part a once.

If we use panning model without any indication of position information (page91), 
it's not easy to image what part we are now seeing, which leads us some difficulty
to get that whole image in our mind.  Viewing a part always with getting its whole 
image is very important to us to find something from that image.   Therefore, we 
added vertical/horizontal scrollbars here, which enables us to get the idea 
1)what size of the whole image, 2) what position we are now seeing.

>that at the cost of a crappy interface, but there's no reason at all why a
>panning interface can't give you some indication of what subset of the

We've also considered the possiblity, with panning interface,  to have some 
small woindow which shows us the whole image size and its position.   
However, I don't see any reason this is a better idea than scrollbars...

In the case of documents, those have position information in themselves, and
we don't need such in our user interface.   This is the reason why I thought
page(1) was originally designed for documents.

Kenji



             reply	other threads:[~2001-03-05  1:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-05  1:10 okamoto [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-03-04 19:15 rog
2001-03-03  2:49 rob pike
2001-03-03  3:58 ` Fariborz 'Skip' Tavakkolian
2001-03-02  5:19 okamoto

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010305011044.485B6199E4@mail.cse.psu.edu \
    --to=okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).