Re: RFC: drop bevel

Since we have the thickness property, is it really necessary to include the 
'1' in 'bevel1up'?

Rod

On Tuesday 28 October 2003 12:10 pm, Charles Goodwin wrote:
> Since we are redoing border anyway, bevel (which is just a form of
> border) seems somewhat redundant.
>
> The properties form and thickness can be easily incorporated in a name
> which can be grafted to the desired root directory where a borders (now
> broken-up) images can be found.
>
> <border name="bevel_1_up" />
>
> Any objections?
>
> On a related note: bevel_1_up or bevel1up?
>
> - Charlie
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> widgets mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/widgets