{OT} - Scripting Terms (Attachability)
{OT} - Scripting Terms (Attachability)
- Subject: {OT} - Scripting Terms (Attachability)
- From: Phi Sanders <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:45:28 -0500
What great development is it to have a Script menu?
I think it's very little conceptually... although few enough apps have them.
So, (in my mind at least) an app with a script menu is simply "scriptable",
and I would reserve "attachable" for apps whose objects and functions can
be "extended" via OSA Scripts :
FaceSpan, BBedit, Script Debugger, Smile, Style, et al.
And I hope no one ever has to say "tinkerable" again...
;)
~Phi
--
Phi Sanders
"And now, back to your regularly scheduled reality."
On 2/7/01, Peter Fine {email@hidden} said the following :
>
on 2/6/01 11:17 AM, Leonard Rosenthol at email@hidden wrote:
>
>
> As one of the people who helped defined the original terms for
>
> "levels" of scripting, I guess I should put my two cents in.
>
>
>
> For anyone keeping historical records, feel free to note that the
>
> first formal discussions about defining types/level of scriptability
>
> took place at a pre-WWDC "coding kitchen" at Pajaro Dunes (CA) in May
>
> of 1992. Among those present (that I remember) were myself
>
> (Aladdin), Don Brown (CE Software), xxx (Word Perfect), Brandon
>
> McCarthy (Claris/FileMaker), xxx (Shana) and some key Apple people
>
> including Mark Thomas (Evangelist) and Don Dehnman ("Father of
>
> AppleScript").
>
>
>
> At the time, we defined four levels of "scriptability" that any given
>
> software product could achieve.
>
>
>
> * Scriptable - supported any Apple events and included an 'aete'.
>
> Since this was BEFORE the Apple Event Object Model (AEOM) existed, we
>
> weren't concerned with "quality" of implementation - just that they
>
> had something!
>
>
>
> * Recordable - allowed the user to record the events as they took
>
> place so they could be played back.
>
>
>
> * Attachable - provided a way for the user to run scripts from "user
>
> interface elements" in the application. At the time, we were
>
> thinking more along the lines of buttons/fields in a database or form
>
> processor, cells in a spreadsheet or folders in the Finder. The idea
>
> of attaching to menus and "Script" menus came later - most likely as
>
> a response to Jens' Script Menu and my OSA Menu.
>
>
>
> * Tickerability - allowed the user to override, replace or add
>
> functionality to an application through scripting. This is what
>
> products like Style and Script Debugger do by allowing users to
>
> install handlers that can modify standard application behavior.
>
>
>
>
>
> Whether these terms are still valid and/or accurate, and should still
>
> be used as is or with modification is a discussion that comes up
>
> every few months. I simply offer the above as a historical
>
> perspective and a starting point for those having the discussion
>
> today with respect to what we "pioneers" believed almost 10 years ago
>
> (wow!).
>
>
>
>
Attachable has been used rather consistently in Apple publications to mean
>
something broader than Leonard sets forth. Tinkerable, thank God, has never
>
been used by Apple and seems to have been know only to the Innermost of the
>
Innermost.
>
>
For current use, the choice seems to be between using "attachable" in a
>
broad sense or splitting the subject matter into "attach" = "has a Scripts
>
menu" and "embeddable" = "everything else".
>
>
I know they're just words, but that's how we communicate!
>
>
Peter
>
_______________________________________________
>
applescript-users mailing list
>
email@hidden
>
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users