From: Leonard Rosenthol (leonardr_at_lazerware.com)
Date: Fri Nov 07 2003 - 08:26:12 EST
At 4:46 PM +1100 11/7/03, Martin Sevior wrote:
> > First thing you need to do is determine the metaphor - are
> > you a "slide-based" tool or an "outline-based" one? Each has
>> advantages and disadvantages...
>>
>
>The metaphore is a "slide based" I think. At least I think that is what
>PowerPoint is and I want a program like Powerpoint.
No, PowerPoint is outline based. It has an outline for the
contents which are directly linked to the content elements such that
editing of one is reflected immediately in the other. This is the
harder of the two types to develop, but certainly the more powerful.
So if PPT is the model, then are you also going to keep a
"flat" slide show or do you want to "expand" to a hierarchical model
ala Persuasion and Apple's Keynote?
> > Then you should consider how "masters" work. Are they
>> initial "templates" or are they true "style sheets"?
>
>OK I see what you mean. In my view they would be styles. We would
>enlarge our style coverages to allow per fl_SlideLayout properties.
If you look at PPT and other similar tools, you'll see that
what you really need is a hierarchical model where you have not only
character and paragraph styles (as you do for AW), but then each of
those becomes a "child" of a level style, a block style, etc.
>In general per slide changes would not change the templates. That would
>happen via something like our style dialog.
Good. But can AW's engine currently handle simple overrides
of base styles? Can it handle reapplication of a base style - AND
keep relative overrides?
Leonard
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Leonard Rosenthol <mailto:leonardr_at_lazerware.com> <http://www.lazerware.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 07 2003 - 08:36:03 EST