 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:37:24 +1000, "Chris Cason"
<newsadmin@-despam-povray.org> wrote:
>> Well, it's certainly not more "appropriate" from a users viewpoint,
>
>I disagree. The more file types I add to the drop-down box, the longer
>it takes the 99% of users who do not use these additional extensions
>(*.xml, *.html, *.java, and all the other types the editor understands)
>to scroll through the list of types in the drop-down box to find the one
>they want.
Heh... Not if you place the POV file types at the "top" of the list.
:)
Seriously though, this isn't worth arguing about. I truly appreciate
all your efforts on POV-Ray, but it's clear you don't want to add this
small feature. I can live with that.
>I've already added .mcr since I believe it is becoming fairly common. I
>would have te be convinced that a large number of users are editing files
>using the other extensions before I added them.
>
>-- Chris
That's certainly fair. I appreciate the addition of ".mcr" to the list
of recognized file types.
I also want to make sure you realize how much we all appreciate
POV-Ray, and all the hard work that you, and all the other team
members put into it.
Thanks for listening,
Glen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:37:24 +1000, "Chris Cason"
<newsadmin@-despam-povray.org> wrote:
>I would have te be convinced that a large number of users are editing
>files using the other extensions before I added them.
Regrettably, RL will probably limit my near future usage of POV to
confirming bugs, maybe finding a few incidentally, and answering
TAG-related questions. OTOH, RL will hopefully include a lot of
writing of HTML, CSS, XML and javaScript and I am yet to find a better
Windows editor than POV (save Vim, but most of its advanced features
don't help much for HTML edit ting, so...)
Next month we'll see. Maybe I'll withdraw my name from the poll :)
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vip bg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:04:57 +0300, Peter Popov <pet### [at] vipbg> wrote:
>Regrettably, RL will probably limit my near future usage of POV to
>confirming bugs, maybe finding a few incidentally, and answering
>TAG-related questions. OTOH, RL will hopefully include a lot of
>writing of HTML, CSS, XML and javaScript and I am yet to find a better
>Windows editor than POV (save Vim, but most of its advanced features
>don't help much for HTML edit ting, so...)
Yeah, I was kind of looking forward to seeing a few POV-Ray websites
that bragged about actually being written with POV-Ray itself. It can
certainly still be done, but the addition of a specific "file open"
option for html and related file extextensions, would have made
things a little bit more convenient.
What I had imagined was a single option in the file type menu, that
would show files of the following file extensions in the directory
listing:
*.asp, *.css, *.htm*, *.shtml, *.xml
However, it should be mentioned that the POV editor currently does not
offer color highlighting for CSS or SHTML files. I'm not sure how
practical is would have been to tell POV to treat CSS files as if they
were HTML, for the purpose of color coding. I guess it doesn't matter
now anyway.
Peter, have you thought of using "First Page" for web editting? It's
pretty good, and it's totally free. You should find it here:
http://www.evrsoft.com/
Later,
Glen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Ben Chambers
Subject: Re: Is the "File Open" dialog box missing a few file types?
Date: 17 Sep 2001 10:13:33
Message: <3ba6050d@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Peter Popov" <pet### [at] vipbg> wrote in message
news:ac4bqt0kdegoa3fjparqn2il29p3vlcd20@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:37:24 +1000, "Chris Cason"
> <newsadmin@-despam-povray.org> wrote:
>
> >I would have te be convinced that a large number of users are editing
> >files using the other extensions before I added them.
>
> Regrettably, RL will probably limit my near future usage of POV to
> confirming bugs, maybe finding a few incidentally, and answering
> TAG-related questions. OTOH, RL will hopefully include a lot of
> writing of HTML, CSS, XML and javaScript and I am yet to find a better
> Windows editor than POV (save Vim, but most of its advanced features
> don't help much for HTML edit ting, so...)
You only need to open the file once, and then it's on the "recent files"
list.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Rune
Subject: Re: Is the "File Open" dialog box missing a few file types?
Date: 17 Sep 2001 15:18:06
Message: <3ba64c6e@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris Cason" wrote:
> I've already added .mcr since I believe it is
> becoming fairly common.
Sorry, but I think this is perhaps not such a good idea.
If it is added there should be a definition of what it means; some kind of
standardization. What if a file has both macros and other things, should it
then be an .inc or a .mcr ? And should .mcr mean one macro only, or could it
also contain several?
The truth is that it's very difficult to make any meaningful standardization
of this that is also useful. Users can never be sure that .inc files won't
contain macros, and neither that .mcr files will be strictly macros only, so
in reality there'll be no added benefit of supporting this extension.
Furthermore none of the official files have the .mcr extension, and that of
course is strange if the format is really officially supported. We could
change the extensions of some of the official files, but I for one wouldn't
know which (because of the beforementioned issues).
I think that all the new extension really does is to clutter up the
extensions, force users to memorize yet another one, cause confusion and so
on. Ask yourself if there's any real reason to add it.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:57:52 -0400, Glen Berry <7no### [at] ezwvcom>
wrote:
>Yeah, I was kind of looking forward to seeing a few POV-Ray websites
>that bragged about actually being written with POV-Ray itself.
Dunno about POV websites, but I can point you to about a dozen I've
done that have a meta generator tag that says "POV-Ray for Windows
v3.1g" :)
That is, unless my boss has decided to underline a word and opened the
thing in that crappy FP thing he uses.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Bob H
Subject: Re: Is the "File Open" dialog box missing a few file types?
Date: 17 Sep 2001 19:35:45
Message: <3ba688d1$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote in message
news:3ba64c6e@news.povray.org...
> "Chris Cason" wrote:
> > I've already added .mcr since I believe it is
> > becoming fairly common.
>
> Sorry, but I think this is perhaps not such a good idea.
>
> If it is added there should be a definition of what it means; some kind of
> standardization. What if a file has both macros and other things, should
it
> then be an .inc or a .mcr ? And should .mcr mean one macro only, or could
it
> also contain several?
---snip---
Yet another extension for functions, .fun, could be feasible too. But
seriously, I have to say that organization is paramount and if mcr helps in
that regard I'm all for it. It's up to the end user to judge what goes in a
certain file type.
I probably shouldn't have mentioned a extension for designating function
calls or whatever. It sounds feasible to me after saying that.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
I disagree with everything you said. I lobbied for that extention addition
and am very happy Chris added it.
--
Ken Tyler - POV-Ray Technical Assistance Group
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: Is the "File Open" dialog box missing a few file types?
Date: 18 Sep 2001 12:13:08
Message: <3ba77294@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3BA6A5BB.7D79EE60@pacbell.net> , Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet>
wrote:
> Rune wrote:
>
> I disagree with everything you said. I lobbied for that extention addition
> and am very happy Chris added it.
I completely agree with Rune, but as extensions don't matter on Macs...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Rune
Subject: Re: Is the "File Open" dialog box missing a few file types?
Date: 18 Sep 2001 14:33:18
Message: <3ba7936e@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ken" wrote:
> I disagree with everything you said. I lobbied for that
> extention addition and am very happy Chris added it.
And what is your answers to the questions I raised?
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
