Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes



Ed, if you've written the code for "both" (2-pane and not 2-pane) then
couldn't you include both and let the user decide?  In your software
architecture, it seems to me that the UI is clearly separated from the
engine, so this optionality should cost very little.  Unless you threw away
the some code...

Jawed

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Stan Schwartz
> Sent: 23 July 2001 04:28
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
>
>
> Ed,
>
> I vote for an option for the two-pane approach--definitely.
>
> Stan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of EdHamrick@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:03 PM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
>
> I keep going back and forth on this myself.  Most other scanner
> software uses a 2-pane approach with the options and
> buttons in one area and an image that's never obscured in
> another area.
>
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick
>
>




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.