Stan Sieler writes:

>   1) if the window doesn't have the focus, clicking anywhere in it
>      brings the window to focus *WITHOUT* changing the cursor location.
>
>   2) A second click would then change the cursor location.
>
>That's how Reflection 1 works, and how MS Word 2000 works.

I'd expect this in Reflection, given the nature of the beast (a terminal
emulator), but the Word 2000 behavior is very different from the way
Windows apps have worked up to now. Incidentally, it's non-trivial to do
in an app that (unlike Reflection) always responds to mouse clicks by
moving the caret.

>Once you try it, you realize: it's the obviously the way to do things.

That's the way every app on the Macintosh works. Yes, it's the right way
to do things. The latest Microsoft UI design publication (_Microsoft
Windows User Experience_, Microsoft Press, 1999) specifies that clicking
in an inactive window should *not* move the caret or change the
selection. However, the way that the system is implemented, clicking the
mouse in an inactive window causes that window to become active, and then
causes a mouse click event to be sent to it. So the application has to
use some heuristics to determine what the user actually did, and ignore
the mouse click if it looks like the click was the same one that caused
the window to become active. Most apps don't do that, and the older UI
design document didn't specify the behavior either way.

-- Bruce


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Toback    Tel: (602) 996-8601| My candle burns at both ends;
OPT, Inc.            (800) 858-4507| It will not last the night;
11801 N. Tatum Blvd. Ste. 142      | But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends -
Phoenix AZ 85028                   | It gives a lovely light.
btoback AT optc.com                |     -- Edna St. Vincent Millay
Mail sent to [log in to unmask] will be inspected for a
fee of US$250. Mailing to said address constitutes agreement to
pay, including collection costs.