Re: Outline and Table back to front
Re: Outline and Table back to front
- Subject: Re: Outline and Table back to front
- From: Greg Titus <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:02:04 -0700
On Jun 20, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Thomas Davie wrote:
On Jun 20, 2005, at 6:41 PM, Greg Titus wrote:
On Jun 20, 2005, at 10:34 AM, Thomas Davie wrote:
Not all outline views are table views, however, all table views are
outline views, therefore outline view should be higher the the
hierarchy.
I don't see how "not all outline views are table views" possibly
makes sense.
A table view has rows and columns. An outline view has rows and
columns and contracted/expanded widgets and indentation. Not all
table views have contracted/expanded widgets and indentation.
Therefore all outline views are table views, but not all table views
are outline views. Thus table view is the superclass.
No, you just contradicted yourself - table views do not have the
ability to collapse/expand items - therefore logically any object with
this ability is *not* a table view.
No, you are being inconsistent.
Earlier you wrote:
At a more abstract level - a computer is a thing. So is a baseball
bat.
Things can hit balls, and do calculations (as I can give you an
example thing that does either of these).
Computers con not hit balls
Bats cannot do calculations.
At a more abstract level - an outline is a table.
Tables can expand/collapse, and have indentation (as I can give you an
example table that does either of these).
Other particular tables can not expand/collapse.
Other particular tables can not have indentation.
The argument here is exactly the same. Superclass to subclass moves
from the abstract to the specific.
- Greg
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden