Clarification of layout proposal

According to Rod, this made things a little clearer:

[16:05] <charlieg2> some messages back, i said to keep xwt.standard
[16:06] <charlieg2> but nobody listened :/
[16:06] <charlieg2> my way gives you 4 distinct categories with 4 distinct
purposes
[16:06] <charlieg2> xwt.standard / standard theme, designed to be overlayed
[16:06] <charlieg2> xwt.widget / widget docs and preapplies
[16:07] <charlieg2> xwt.theme[.common] / common code to most themes, with
theme impl docs
[16:07] <charlieg2> xwt.lib[.common] / generic code
[16:09] <hotrod> i see now
[16:09] <hotrod> yeah, that will work
[16:09] <charlieg2> david is trying to compress it into 3, but by doing
that, you lose the separation of lib/theme code
[16:10] <charlieg2> i don't want _keypress stuff in lib code
[16:10] <charlieg2> and he wants preapplies outside of theme code
[16:10] <charlieg2> (and i kinda agree with that)

So what I'm saying is:

xwt.standard
// standard theme, there to be overlay()ed
// and stuff here preapplies xwt.widget stuff

xwt.widget
// contains behaviour preapplies from xwt.theme.common
// and a preapply from xwt.theme

xwt.theme[.common]
// stuff common to most themes (common _keypress etc)
// including layout traps (_layoutbox = f() { ... })

xwt.lib[.common]
// library stuff, many widgets won't have a namesake
// here because their behaviour is 'common'

I kinda stated it already, but didn't go over the overlay() bit which is
obviously important:
http://lists.xwt.org/pipermail/dev/2003-April/002739.html

Anyway, what do you think?  (Other than we need a new name for common.)
_______________________________________________
http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/dev