RE: Fields -- are we ready to tackle them now?


Subject: RE: Fields -- are we ready to tackle them now?
From: Henrik Berg (henrik@lansen.se)
Date: Fri Feb 11 2000 - 05:31:29 CST


> Thanks for getting started on this. I hope you're aware of how big a
> minefield you've stepped into. Essentially, we're not going to be able to
> release binaries which include a Field dialog until we fix a *bunch* of
> stuff under the hood.

Half way thru I had a clear picture of this fact. To my defense I like to say that with the possibility to easily inserting fields comes the urge to fix them.

I was looking at initially looking at something simple as page number *grin*. Not simple! It involves header/footer with a page number field inserted, so in order to do page number and header/footer there must be a way to add fields. So it all pointed to the Field dialog.

I like to say that I agree totally that the Field Dialog is not ready for binary releases. Perhaps it should be in UT_DEBUG?

> 1. File format
> ---------------
> However, releasing a UI for this feature now would make the problem much
> more serious.

Naturally, having more people saving files using a format that will change is not good.

> 5. What should the dialog UI be?
> ---------------------------------
> I took a look for abi/shots/wp/win/field.png in your checkin, and didn't see
> it, but from scanning Bonsai, it looks like you've designed a *very* simple
> dialog.

It's very simple. As long as our list of field is short it will be no problem. As we add fields, it will be good to add a category, like this:

_ADDFILED( IDC_DATETIME, ID_TIME_SAVE, "time_save", "Save Date" );
_ADDFILED( IDC_DATETIME, ID_TIME_CREATED, "time_create", "Creation Date" );
_ADDFILED( IDC_DATETIME, ID_TIME_NOW, "time", "Current Time" );

> I'm not sure whether we'll need all of Word's complexity here, but as soon
> as we have a decent idea what #3 looks like, we should have more insight
> into what's needed for this dialog.

Well, Word has just one more listbox, and an option for changing format. It's not than much to add, when we have the functionality.

> There are probably also issues about how to handle localization here, but
> I'm sure you'll have great ideas on how to handle that.

After several mistakes, Word has reverted to NOT localizing field names, and as a result of that even the description is not translated. I don't know how we should do, but it's not a straight forward thing.

> bottom line
> -----------
> Before we go too much further down the path of working on the Fields dialog,
> I'd like to make sure we've got enough people thinking about and addressing
> the underlying issues outlined above.
>
> OK?

Yes, indeed!

--hb



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Feb 11 2000 - 05:47:12 CST