Re: New Tiger dictionary format example posted
Re: New Tiger dictionary format example posted
- Subject: Re: New Tiger dictionary format example posted
- From: "Shane Stanley" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 10:04:51 -0700
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:46:42 +0100, has wrote:
>While it's not necessary to show this information for Cocoa apps (though
>its presence is certainly helpful), it _is_ essential to show it for
>Carbon apps as those depend on the developer to implement and document
>the supported reference forms for each element.
Yep.
>I can understand why the AppleScript engineers might want to omit
>superfluous information to make application dictionaries smaller and
>simpler to read, but omitting this particular information is inconvenient
>at least and downright wrong at worst. Paradoxically, subclasses still
>insist on listing elements already inherited from parent classes, which
>is completely redundant duplicate information. Automatically stripping
>that junk would significantly shorten dictionaries (e.g. see my
>HTMLDictionary app which already does this).
I disagree. In fact, I'm not sure where you're seeing this happen, except
in Script Debugger, where it's an option much appreciated by many users.
Tracking down properties that are inherited from two or three of levels
above an element can be a nightmare of backwards-and-forwards. It's one
of the great stumbling blocks for beginners. (I'd actually like to see a
button that toggles inherited elements on and off to suit.)
But the way inheritance is flagged in the Tiger Script Editor is way too
easy to miss altogether.
--
Shane Stanley <email@hidden>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden