🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2451@tekcrl.TEK.COM> eirik@tekcrl.TEK.COM (Eirik Fuller) writes:
>This makes me wonder why the close box (upper left on a typical window)
>doesn't work the same way in applications as in Finder (iconify
>windows).

I wouldn't call what the Finder's close operation does "iconifying"
the window.  This implies that the window turns into the icon.  In the
Finder, however, the icon is still there while the window is open.
Opening an object makes it possible to edit it, closing it makes it
not possible to edit it.  The only difference is that in the Finder
you can click on the object to reopen it, while in applications you
must use a dialog.  Many people have suggested a relatively simple
mechanism to allow additional files to be opened in an already-running
application by clicking on them in MF.  I've also been thinking that a
nice interface to this would be to let the user drag the document icon
into an application window, as if it were a folder window; to be
consistent with the folder analogy, it should also let the user drag
the document onto the application icon.

It's just a matter of time before Apple gets around to implementing
something like this.

>Speaking of smalltalk, all of its windows (for the properly chosen
>meaning of the word "all", i.e. of course I can contradict this if I
>want to, but applications tend not to) can be collapsed.

This sounds nice.  There could be a "collapse box" to go along with
the zoom box.

>All this makes me wonder why collapsing application windows would be
>a bad idea.  Hmmm, someone might get sued if it wasn't there all
>along :-)
>
>Seriously, the reason it would be a bad idea is because it was done
>wrong in the first place and it's too late to fix it.  I hate reasons
>like that.

Why is it too late?  They added the zoom box, and now most
applications use it.  The logic of the collapse box is identical,
except that the new size is tiny instead of huge.



Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
uunet!think!barmar