🚀 go-pugleaf

in article <767@sputnik.tc.fluke.COM>, mce@fluke.UUCP says:
> 
> The dual view concept is a good idea, but wouldn't it be even better
> if both views were active?  I have watched several people, myself
> included, futilely try make the mouse do something, anything, in the
> reduced view.  It is extremely non-intuitive as it stands, and that is
> a Bad Thing.
> 
> 
> Brian McElhinney
> mce@tc.fluke.com	


Well, you've surely got a point, this is what I wanted to clarify that
the reviewer misunderstood; but let's think about it.


I don't think I really want to do picture adjustments at a reduced 
scale -- it would be too hard to separate and select items.

Now, Word 3 uses a magnifying glass to show parts of the reduced view.
Not at all sure I want the complications of navigating within a magnifying 
glass within a document, either.


The way SuperPaint works, I do all operations on the active window, at
full size.  The 'reduced view' is just that -- a place to see what happens,
as it happens, to the whole picture.

Because of 2-d window scrolling, I can move freely from where I start,
over the full drawing for large selections.  For instance, selecting 
everything, and moving it to be pleasingly 'centered' on the page.

The selection rectangle also shows up in the reduced view:  I can see
everything I'm doing two ways.


I think the real problem (yes, I had it too), is communicating to all
of us who only have experience with MacPaint, that a better way has been 
provided.

Maybe making this approach a main feature of the documentation would be a
start -- the how-to's could use it in their pictures.

Points up the difficulties with standards which become the 'intuitive'
and therefore the only way, when better ideas come along.  An old story.

SuperPaint's worth paying attention to the difference, to me at least.


Clive Steward