Re: Scripting Palm Desktop (was Re: Saving an attachment from Entourage)
Re: Scripting Palm Desktop (was Re: Saving an attachment from Entourage)
- Subject: Re: Scripting Palm Desktop (was Re: Saving an attachment from Entourage)
- From: "Jason W. Bruce" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:16:55 +0000
Paul,
I must say how surprised I am to see your characterization of the Palm
Desktop's dictionary as abominable. I absolutely love the application and
think that it's scripting implementation is good. Remember, as a former
Claris product, it had one of the earlier and more faithful implementations
of AppleScript. And it's free!!!
When Palm took over Claris Organizer, they changed certain dictionary
terms in an effort to make them consistent with the terms used in the Palm
OS -- the operating system which runs handheld devices. This broke existing
scripts and introduced a few terms which conflict with AppleScript keywords
-- a huge faux pas because they really should have known better -- but not
one which affected functionality. For most scripting needs, the dictionary
is fine. And for the few problem areas, there are acceptable workarounds.
Like any scriptable application, however, I think one needs to be
familiar with the application and to think the way the application thinks.
The Palm Desktop is at its heart a database (not a text editor or email
application), and it's object model makes sense if you approach it from that
perspective.
As I mentioned to Allen, I think you're scaring people away needlessly
from scripting a fantastic product. Out of curiosity, which particular
features of the dictionary do you consider to be abominable?
Jason Bruce
>
Palm Desktop's applescripting implementation is abominable. Its dictionary
>
bears no relation to what (sometimes) works. It appears to have been badly
>
done in the first place (when it was another app called, I think, 'Claris
>
Desktop' or similar), and then not to have changed when the app itself
>
changed. It is the perfect example of how not to implement AppleScript. You
>
are correct that someone from PD has been openly corresponding here for some
>
time. I suspect he must be ashamed of the AS implementation and probably is
>
directed to other aspects of development by his superiors, but I really have
>
no idea. I've been wondering for some time if he was ever going to give some
>
sort of explanation reconciling his AS interests with his application's
>
tawdry implementation, so perhaps he would like to take this as an
>
invitation to tell us about future AS plans for PD. (I hope he will excuse
>
me for not remembering his name.) I won't touch it myself.
>
>
--
>
Paul Berkowitz