[news.eclipse.tools.gef] Re: thinner palette UI when docked

["Randy Hudson" <none@xxxxxxxxxx>]

The only change I would consider would be to place the Palette "tab" above 
the vertical scrollbar.
This would require that we never display the canvas' real scrollbar, and 
that we link selection of an external scrollbar to the canvas.

"Pratik Shah" <none@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
news:dim00m$d94$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Al Major" <alnospammajor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:dikh47$ge1$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Pratik Shah wrote:
>> > Open a feature request if you want this tracked.  Getting rid of the
> palette
>> > view is not an option (it was introduced since a lot of clients were
>> > creating their own palette view).  We can consider making the collapsed
>> > flyout narrower though.
>> >
>>
>> where/how do i open a feature request? bugzilla?
>
> Yes.  Mark it as an enhancement.  This won't be a priority, and we might 
> not
> even address anything (except maybe the thinner collapsed flyout).
> PaletteView is also beneficial for really large palettes (hundreds of
> items), and some clients use it exclusively (i.e., no flyout in the editor
> if the view is not there).  The real estate gain from making the flyout
> shorter is not going to be much (esp. if we make it narrower), and I don't
> think it's best in terms of usability (do you know of any other program 
> that
> does the same?).
>
>>
>> since the main benefit of the palette view is that you don't have the
>> dead real-estate of the collapsed flyout, i'm guessing that the need
>> will go away if the suggestion i made gets incorporated. especially if
>> the "tab-only-collapsed-flyout" can be implemented. just a thinner
>> flyout may not be enough (the bulk of the height is still
>> non-interactive real estate).
>>
>> it would certainly be worth asking clients why they wanted a  palette
>> view in the first place. maybe i'm wrong and there's another reason.
>>
>> thx,
>>
>> al
>
>