RE: "Classic Controls" package

[Jim K. <ji...@ji...>]

Niels,

>=20
> Jim,
>=20
> I certainnly agree with you,- espicially relating to the OpenG Style.
>=20
> However, I'd preferred that it was the other way round: Having the 2D
> controls in the main entry and the 3D controls as a sub menu. You're=20
> actually creating quite a lot more non-GUI windows than GUI windows!
>=20

You're right!  Hmmm... Well, the original idea for the Dynamic Palette =
View
was that it was going to be just like the "default/advanced" Palette =
View,
but with the palettes, synch'ed to specific folders.  However, I really =
like
your idea.  The problem is that I think that this would create quite a =
bit
of work.  I'll have to think about that one, for a little while.  I am =
also
hesitant to change the Dynamic Palette View to a 2D controls because I =
don't
want to turn off users who are not OpenG Developers and really like the
super cool 3D controls ;-)  It would be great if there were a really =
easy
way to allow users to choose between 3D and 2D controls as the root =
controls
palette of the Dynamic Palette View.

>=20
> BTW the 'Complete Waveform' control has a bad linkage in 'Numeric'->=20
> 'Classic Numeric'!
>=20

Actually, I don't think that there is such a thing as 'Complete =
Waveform'
(any more).  The numeric controls palette links to this missing control =
but
the ./menus/default/readonly.txt file prevents the question mark from
appearing in the palette.  I haven't yet decided if I want to delete =
this
dead-link or just make it disappear with a readonly.txt file.  I'll fix =
this
before the official release of 'Classic Controls'.

> Just my $0.02.
>=20
> All the best
> Niels
>=20

Regards,

-Jim