<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/13/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Joachim Ansorg</b> <<a href="mailto:nospam+bt-devel@joachim-ansorg.de">nospam+bt-devel@joachim-ansorg.de</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br>that's pretty cool! I'll test the exe as soon as possible. I guess we could<br>even link Qt statically.</blockquote><div><br>
If you want me to try that, just let me know. Not being the most
proficient cross-platform developer, how would that be done
differently from the current system? I think it would make a lot
of sense in real releases for Windows/Qt4 to have the library linked
statically into the exe, thus simplifying installation.
Alternatively, one of the advantages of the .dll set-up, as I
understand it, is that someone would not have to have code replicated
in multiple (in this case Qt4 based) applications.<br>
<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>> > 6. In a sudden burst of inspirational genius moments before I went to<br>
> > bed, I looked again in the Qt directory - there is no debugging version<br>> > of the libqtmain, so the libqtmaind is not there. So I changed everything<br>> > to building a release version and found that
ld.exe bailed out on<br>> > -lsword. I fixed that by adding a line to LIBS that included my<br>> > libsword.a and the program built perfectly. Now, true... I don't have a<br>> > debug version available under Windows, but I do now have a
bibletime2.exe<br>> > built.<br><br>In Linux I just set symlinks from the non-debug to the debug version to be<br>able to debug the test program.</blockquote><div><br>
Symlinks are wonderful... when will Windows have something that handy?
:) I thought about using a regular Windows link, but I don't know
if it would function.<br>
<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> > Just as a final note, I much prefer the UI of the current Bibletime. I<br>
> > think the strongest feature of Bibletime and MacSword is the fact that<br>> > the windows within can be rearranged freely, rather than relying on<br>> > pre-positioned panels with sliders. But I realize this is mainly a
<br>> > proof-of-concept at the moment. I look forward to the upcoming success!<br><br>I think the UI of BT 1.x is fine but is not usuable for many open windows. And<br>the toolbars eat up too much space.<br>I thought of a concept similair to konquerors "split current view left/right",
<br>and "splitt top/bottom". Each tab window could be splitted to hold module<br>displays like "Bible on the left, lexicon in the lower right and a commentary<br>in the upper right corner". And the Bible part could display some Bibles in
<br>parallel.<br>That way we have everything important in one window and we can have several<br>windows open without cluttering the screen.<br>We'd have one toolbar which changes if you change a tab.</blockquote><div><br>
That sounds massively complicated in writing, but if I hear you right,
it sounds like you want a setup that is similar to Biblestudy/BibleCS,
where sliders are used to resize a few different panels, but the user
can hide panels. But what do you do when user A wants Bible in
the upper right, commentary in the upper left and lexicon on the
bottom, while user B wants commentary in the upper right, lexicon in
the upper left and Bible on the bottom while user C only wants
commentary and Bible? You would need to program in a ridiculous
number of options. Also, each panel would require its own
navigation pane.<br>
<br>
I think it might be better to keep the multiple tabs, like you are
recommending, and allow a few basic setups, like "left/right,"
"top/bottom," "left/top right/top bottom," "top left/bottom left/right"
and so on (still a LOT of nearly redundant coding, if you ask me) and
allow each of those panels to hold any type of text. Then,
possibly Gabriel's idea could come in handy with the "Press F7 to bring
up a navigation dialog" type of navigation from the active panel.<br>
<br>
</div>That said, I still like the freedom of moving and resizing child
windows as desired, but might it be possible to do that, while using
Gabriel's idea for navigation and/or utillizing one toolbar that
changes as different child windows are selected? I think the
free-floating window panes is one of the strongest points in favor of
Bibletime/MacSword when compared with Gnomesword, Biblestudy, and
BibleCS.<br>
</div><br>
--Greg<br>