[Cuis-dev] Talking about Layouts

[ken.dickey at whidbey.com]

I think we have a user interface problem with 
LayoutSpec>>minorDirectionPadding:

One is easily confused, so perhaps our descriptions are wrong -- we are 
talking badly.

In particular, I would like to use "attraction" rather than "padding", 
but see below.

===============================================

I also propose a brief discussion in the Terse Guide.

Perhaps something like:
=========================

LayoutMorph's arrange subMorphs as either a horizontal Row or a vertical 
Column.

Along this Major or Layout Axis, subMorphs may be attracted toward one 
side (0.0) or the other (1.0) or anywhere in between.

If a Row, one can specify the placement attraction symbolically as
   { #rowLeft (0.0), #center (0.5), #rowRight (1.0) }

If a Column, one can specify the placement attraction symbolically as:
   { #colTop (0.0), #center (0.5), #colBottom (1.0) }

A LayoutMorph may also have a Morph Separation specified as x at y

======

Each subMorph of a LayoutMorph may have an optional LayoutSpec which the 
subMorph uses to indicate how that Morph  wants to be arranged by its 
containing LayoutMorph.

Options include treating the Morph's width and height as fixed or 
proportional to the LayoutMorph's extent.

A LayoutSpec may also indicate an attraction along the Minor or Contrary 
Axis.

Again, symbols may be used.

If in a LayoutMorph Row: { #rowTop (0.0), #center (0.5), #rowBottom 
(1.0)}

If in a LayoutMorph Column: { #colLeft (0.0), #center (0.5), #colRight 
(1.0) }

=============================================================

I propose we change the access methods
   LayoutMorph>>padding: --> LayoutMorph>>attraction:
   LayoutSpec>>minorDirectionPadding: --> LayoutSpec>>attraction:

And use the symbols as above in place of {#right, #top, #left, #bottom}.


Does this seem sensible?  Is there a better way to describe this?

Up for discussion..

Thanks!
-KenD