Re: ObjectWare repository -- Re: [ANN] CHColorMapControl

FROM : Scott Anguish
DATE : Fri Nov 01 07:06:14 2002

Objectware could be sub-categorized (it's already a subcategory of
Development)...  I prefer to have the content drive the creation of new
categories, rather than over-categorizing from the start.  Empty
categories just piss people off.

But there isn't a good set of distinctions in the divisions you suggest
from the PowerPlant archive... All of these are very closely related. 
Also, the AppKit provides more higher-level objects, so it's unlikely
we'll see a significant number (greater than 10 lets say) table
variants for example, since it's not necessary to reinvent them from
scratch.  Any table will inherit from View for example.  Which is it?

Perhaps breaking on Foundation, Appkit, communication/internet might
work...

but what to do with collections such as the Omni ones where there are
multiple types of objects in the same collection?  This seems like it'd
be better to include the types of classes that are included as part of
the keywords field.



On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 12:10 AM, Jonathan Wight wrote:

> The main problem with looking for source code/classes on softrak as it
> stands right now is that it doesn't seem to have subcategories. I have
> to
> browse through all the source code entries (or rely on luck with a
> search)
> to find something I might be interested in. The Powerplant archive
> organised
> things by class type - e.g. Views, Controls, Tables, etc.
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | <email_removed>
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.