home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Atari Mega Archive 1
/
Atari Mega Archive - Volume 1.iso
/
lists
/
gem
/
l_0799
/
425
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-08-27
|
4KB
From: mforget@elfhaven.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Michel Forget)
Subject: Re: Ofir's digest 11.06
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 1994 01:29:18 -0600
Precedence: bulk
Hello Ofir,
[>In message <Pine.3.89.9406111033.C2848-0100000@mhc.mtholyoke.edu>,
[>rflashma@mhc.mtholyoke.edu said:
[>I am not aware of any changes to the clip standard. My GEM docs from 89
[>are the same as the 93 COmpendium. We had this discussion before on
[>Usenet. Non-standard implementation is one of the reason I stopped using
[>STalker (although I paid full price for it) and moved on to use CoNnect.
I, also, never knew about any changes to the standard. When was STalker
released, though? Perhaps Rick Flashman meant that the document had
been changed prior to 1989?
[>It depends on your code, it will take me about 1/2 an hour to make my
[>Voice Mail program compliant to the new standard. I also believe that if
[>the standard is established, users will come to expect programs to use it,
[>if you want your products to sell in Germany (and the UK market is also
[>moving in this direction) you will have to produce programs that follow
[>the guidelines (if you can decide which guidelines to follow :-).
The actual changes to the code are simple, I'm sure. For a business to
get there needs to the programmer, wait while he does it, update the
documentation, change the packaging, get the program back, duplicate
the disks, and other stuff that commercial developers probably have
to do wold cost money, though. (Things like this make me glad I
develop Shareware...)
[>I fully agree with you. We are currently debating the format of the
[>configuration file. Your comments will be useful.
I thought that this had been decided. Warwick (?) posted some source
code that showed how to read the file... It looked pretty complex... :)
[>In message <2df65b90249e@elfhaven.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca>, mforget@elfhaven.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca said:
[>>
[>>No; here is an example of what "Abandon" does. Assume that I have a text
[>>file on a disk. It contains the words "This is a text file.". I load
[>>the text file into my editor, and change the sentence to something
[>>else. I decide that I want the original back, so I press Control-H.
[>>The changes are thrown away and the document is reloaded. It does
[>>no close the window, iconify it, or do anything to it except restore
[>>the document in it to its original form.
[>
[>I see what you mean. HiSoft call this revert. I'm not sure if a keyboard
[>shortcut is required fro such an option. Comments?
In this case, HiSoft is non-standard. All the programs that I have seen
which support this feature do call it "Abandon". i think Windows programs
also have this option. As for needing a keyboard equivalent, I would
say yes. I use the feature at least three times a day... (usually when
I do something stupid like insert a block a few more times than I wanted
to because I was slow to let go of the Control+V combination).
[>In message <P8874@K.maus.de>, Michael_Nolte@k.maus.de said:
[>>
[>>Ofir Gal:
[>>>CTRL D - Abandon Window (iconify or place in menu)
[>>I'd prefer CTRL-H.
[>
[>Which should we use then? CTRL+D or CTRL+H? Are there any programs that
[>implement this feature? Maybe Wilfried can tell us why he wants CTRL+D
[>since it was his idea.
In this case, I think he just meant "iconize window". Nothing else would
really make sense for what was written...
[>Bye,
[>Ofir ogal@cix.compulink.co.uk
--
Michel Forget \\ ess@tibalt.supernet.ab.ca
Electric Storm Software \\ mforget@elfhaven.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca