Posted by
Robert Baer on
Mar 25, 2006; 4:45pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/ImageJ-mdi-version-tp3703148p3703154.html
Very interesting Damien. I enjoyed looking at it will probably play a
little more.
First as to MDI. I expect the advantages of MDI are in the eye of the
beholder which, in turn, depends on many historical things that differ for
each of us. I am mainly a Windows user and more of my applications use the
MDI than SDI approach so I tend to feel more comfortable with MDI. Jochim
hit upon the 'where is the main menu' thing which is always a little more
certain in a parent-frame world, but just as quickly Wayne reminded us that
the facile SDI user will use <ENTER> to bring the window to the top. (Thanks
for that Wayne). The other thing that sometime frustrates me is the
overpopulation of my task bar with a vast number of 'Image' buttons that are
all subpieces of a single ImageJ project. With Windows XP these eventually
get collected together and grouped (which helps), but I number this
'subtask' invasion of the task bar among the downsides of SDI applications.
For Daminen's 'proof of concept project' he has built an MDI, but he has not
added all of the functionality that one generally finds in such an
application structure. Generally an MDI app is more integrated than a SDI
dumped into a single parent frame. Let me share one example of an MDI
functionality that I use in the Photoshop MDI, and that I sometimes miss in
ImageJ. The context is working with multiple images from multiple treatment
conditions during an experiment. When doing the equivalent of Window | Tile
the Photoshop MDI parent window only tiles those images that are not
minimized. This is a quick and flexible way to make montage like layouts in
the MDI parent frame. The parent window can itself be sized such that I can
look at data in an Excel spreadsheet while contemplating the images. The
parent frame itself is the flexible office space that I work in. The MDI
design encapsulated one philosophy of how to best facilite the work flow.
The SDI supporter will rightfully come back by pointing out that it is far
easier to drag some of the images to monitor 2 in a dual monitor workstation
with an SDI interface. Again the SDI embeds a philosophy of how workflow is
most easily mangaed. Which interface is BETTER is not an answerable
question. In the end, it boils down to the job to be accomplished, the OS
preference and experience of the user, and the creativity and foresight of
the SDI or MDI developer.
I had not heard of 'Swing' before, but the link (
http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/tsc/articles/mixing/ ) that you provide on
your download page seems to suggest that Swing components are light-weight
Java objects that are being positioned as an alternative to AWT components.
I am certain there are trade-offs, but I don't know what they are. For
example, it appears that Swing components have a single thread rule. Would
this have implications for ImagJ? I could not tell if Swing would be an
integrated part of the next JDK or not.
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gabriel Landini" <
[hidden email]>
To: <
[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 4:16 AMs
Subject: Re: ImageJ mdi version
> On Friday 24 March 2006 19:04, Damien Farrell wrote:
>> Anyone interested in the development of a version of ImageJ that uses a
>> single Swing desktop pane for all windows.
>
> Damien,
> What is the advantage of having a single pane?
>
> My past experience with another imaging programme (the defunct Optimas)
> was
> that only 1 pane with everything inside was a bit of a pain rather than a
> plus, but there must be some advantages that I haven't thought about.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gabriel
>