Stack Size and loc for 800 X 600 displays

[Sannyasin Sivakatirswami]

Aloha from Kauai, Scott:

Thanks that makes sense... I've used xTalk all these years for in-house 
stuff and production work (big screens, cinema displays all around...) 
and am really way behind on these interface issues:

OK, the other issue is initial screenloc.
Even at 550, a vertical axis of 300 puts the presentation under the 
menu bar on OSX

Oh... I guess I should be turning off the menu bar on start up and then 
resuming that as needed...
that's doable... I can just add that to the existing handlers for the 
backdrop where desktop is
hidden and shown on demand...

And then, I guess we need to do both
hide menubar
hide taskbar and
show menubar
show taskbar


That should do it to fix this one and for future I'll try to stay in 
700 X 500. Though one does wonder what percentage of users actually 
live in a 800X600 pixel display rect... But of course for projector 
work that will be  very common. As you say... getting a 100% fool proof 
size (unless we drop all the way back to a video 640 X 480) is probably 
too much to ask.

Thanks!

Sivakatirswami


That's leads to more questions about windows: Do

On Dec 11, 2003, at 8:09 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:

> On 12/11/03 9:47 PM, "Sannyasin Sivakatirswami" <katir at hindu.org> 
> wrote:
>
>> I am looking for an optimum set of values
>> that I can just use for everything. do we have to think about vertical
>> toolbars on windows? if so, how many pixels is that off the max width
>> of 800? i.e. should the optimum stack size for 800X600 displays for 
>> all
>> platforms be something like 760 X 550? And if so does "set the loc of
>> this stack to the screenloc" work for all cases? I've had enough
>> feedback to know that most presentors want to be able to access their
>> menus, toolbars etc. and yet still be able to see the whole
>> presentation....  what do you recommend from your experience?
>
> In my work, I use 750 x 550 when pushing for maximum space but 
> allowing for
> menubars/taskbars, etc.  Otherwise, 700 x 500 should be pretty safe 
> for most
> situations.  It's unlikely you'll ever have a 100% foolproof size, 
> though,
> since Windows taskbars can double (triple?) up in height depending on 
> the
> number of icons present.  If sizing is an absolute necessity, your 
> stack
> should be designed to be scalable with standard minimize and maximize
> controls present.
>
> If you want to be anal, test 750 x 550 on a Windows box with large 
> fonts
> enabled to make sure your stack still fits.  I may be wrong but I seem 
> to
> recall using large fonts only adds about 4 pixels vertically to any 
> line of
> type (titlebars and taskbar).
>
> Regards,
>
> Scott Rossi
> Creative Director
> Tactile Media, Multimedia & Design
> -----
> E: scott at tactilemedia.com
> W: http://www.tactilemedia.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>