nbvs@cl.cam.ac.uk (Nicko van Someren) (04/02/91)
A request to those of you out there who write editors, especially those at Acorn. Can we have a new pair of message action numbers to denote a request to invoke and editor from another application. What I envisage is that my application (a database say) broadcasts a message with a similar syntax to a MDATASAVE to say 'I have a file of type xxx and size yyy and the user wants to modify it, but I want it back afterwards.' For the vast majority of editors it would not be hard to open a window with a pane window on one side with a 'DONE' button. When the editor picks up a broadcast it thinks it can deal with it can go through the same procedure it would for a MDATASAVE and allows the use to edit the data. When the user clicks the 'DONE' button the editor would use another message to send the data back, again using a transfer procedure like MDATASAVE, including the message reference number that was sent originally. There should probably be some method to cancel the whole action as well. All it would take would be for Acorn to asign the message numbers and define the message syntax if it needs to be different, then we can write programs that envoke the existing editors and let you jump in and out of them from your hypertext system or what ever. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Nicko van Someren, nbvs@cl.cam.ac.uk, (44) 223 358707 or (44) 860 498903 | | "Go and buy an Aleph One ARM3 card and stop whining!!!" | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
fl@tools.uucp (Frank Lancaster) (04/04/91)
> Can we have a new pair of message action numbers to denote a request to > invoke and editor from another application. What I envisage is that my Good idea. This is just what we need for TeX and METAFONT. The message should also include an optional line number to which the editor should jump. This would also be a good idea for desktop compiler drivers. For METAFONT I hacked a work-around solution which generates a DataOpen message when an error occurs, it also tried to send the keystrokes for !Edit's goto line command to position the cursor, but this only works if the text is not already loaded in the editor because otherwise !Edit does not set the input focus to the file's window. Frank Lancaster, fl@tools.uucp
Gavin.Flower@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Gavin Flower) (04/05/91)
Good idea! It seems very sensible and logical for one application to be able to invoke the "current" editor for the user to edit something and then be able to returnto the invoking application.
How about an extension of this idea. For example it would be nice if !IMPRESSION
could call up a drawing package (eg !DRAW, but could be something else).
One possible method would involve the application checking for a system variable
along the lines of Edit$... or Draw$... (I don't have any Arc documentation here
so I can't refer to examples which might be relevant). If the variable was there
it would appear as a selectable menu item, otherwise it would be greyed out.
This method would allow the user to select the appropiate editor (etc.) to be
invoked. If well defined interfaces and file format were defined *and adhered to*
it might well work quite well. Presumable the key is to associate a file format withthe file type. The only problem I see here is that "text" files that have
*special characters* might mean different things to different editors.
Another possibility is that the edit (or some such) could be used as a "backend", eg
the application would "talk" to it directly so that the application could act as
a "frontend". This would allow the application to provide value added features such as security, sophisticated error checking, and a facility such expanding
abbreviations known to the application, possibly invoking a second "backend" such as a databas . This method would allow the ultimate in customising the user interface.
:-> We are allowed to dream? <-:
-Gavin.
--
The main "user" of well brought up, and educated, children is the community
at large. So if you really believe in "user pays", charge the correct users
- stop overloading parents with financial penalties.
******* These comments have no known correlation with dept. policy! *******nbvs@cl.cam.ac.uk (Nicko van Someren) (04/06/91)
In article <FL.91Apr4124143@fidel.tools.uucp> fl@tools.uucp (Frank Lancaster) writes: >> Can we have a new pair of message action numbers to denote a request to >> invoke and editor from another application. What I envisage is that my > >Good idea. This is just what we need for TeX and METAFONT. The message >should also include an optional line number to which the editor should >jump. This would also be a good idea for desktop compiler drivers. Infact, I think that a pointer offset into the data rather than a line number would be more useful. Then you could select a particular object in !draw, a character in !Edit, a time along a sound sample etc. Maybe even a pair of offsets to select a region (group of objects, line of test, peroid of sample). Any one at Acorn have ideas? +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Nicko van Someren, nbvs@cl.cam.ac.uk, (44) 223 358707 or (44) 860 498903 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+