# Re: Too many options for xscanimage

David Mosberger-Tang (David.Mosberger@acm.org)
Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:00:12 -0800

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: Too many options for xscanimage"
- Previous message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: SANE v1.00 is out! --- Mustek problem"

>>>>> On Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:26:26 +0100 (MET), Manuel Panea <mpd@rzg.mpg.de> said:

Manuel> The number of settable options has got so long that the
Manuel> xscanimage window is too high to fit on my screen
Manuel> (1024x768). Is there any solution for this? I saw that other
Manuel> backends like Mustek or Umax also have lots of options. How
Manuel> do they look like, then?

Umh, that sounds bad. Are all those options really needed? I suspect
a user interface as complex as this would be confusing to first time
users anyhow, no? Anyhow, you could use "advanced" options to hide
some of the less frequently used options. A more general solution
would be to go back to using a GTK notebook so you can select
different pages of options. However, back when we had that, I did not
like it very much because its awkward if you can't see all relevant
options on a single page.

Again, to me the more interesting question is why does that scanner
have that many options and should they really all be exposed to the
user?

--david

    --
    Source code, list archive, and docs: http://www.mostang.com/sane/
    To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe sane-devel | mail majordomo@mostang.com

- Next message: Oliver Rauch: "Re: Too many options for xscanimage"
- Previous message: David Mosberger-Tang: "Re: SANE v1.00 is out! --- Mustek problem"