On Mo, 2004-10-18 at 08:53 -0700, Joshua A. Andler wrote:
and why keep the xml editor? There should be a UI for everything the
xml
editor can do, so the object tree lets you select any object and a properties dialog lets you set the stuff that you otherwise would set int he editor.. not sure if just one dialog though.
I'd be all for the other powerful UI options, but I think even if it doesn't get any advancements, the xml editor would still be useful. As nice as it will be to have an object tree and a properties dialog, sometimes you just need to look at the raw xml to get a better understanding of where an issue may be hiding. Best example I can give is how there are WYSIWYG editors to make web sites, and they have every function possible built into a menu or dialog somewhere, but sometimes you need to just view the code (which to this day I prefer to handwrite websites in a text editor to control everything that goes in there). Could just be me... but I think it would still be useful for those of us that still take that gritty hands-on approach sometimes. Just my .02
-Josh
There is nothing wrong with _having_ the editor. I just don't want to _need_ it and would kinda hide it in an advance menu later on (also used for scripts).
David