micha at amber.biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de micha at amber.biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de
Sun Sep 18 14:37:47 EST 1994

Przemko (przemko at reks.uia.ac.be) wrote:
: Hi!
: I am REALLY tired of command line interface in GCG (or anything else
: for that matter). Perhaps I am lazy or stupid or both.

I expext you can get equally tired of digging thru submenus of submenus
of ... (can you guess what?) ...
I do completely agree with Reinhard Doelz and Christoph Gartmann to keep
up the command line interface - most of the switches you will seldom need,
and so they will become hidden in the menus, or so I hope.
Is it so much difference between menu items (that will ask for parameter 
input again) and the /check switch?

: Anyway WHEN we will have TRUE GCG for X? Anyone knows?
: Or (just dreamin') a Mosaic access...

You aren't really dreaming of this ? 
First, Mosaic lacks the feature of uploading data from a file (e.g. sequence)
into a form, we are still waiting for this to be added.

Then, given the number of switches the average GCG program supports: what
would be the length of the resulting WWW form ? And no 'submenus' here,
just more or less detailed forms! (not to mention the parsing overhead
on the server side if you don't want to write extra programs for WWW)

Last, I can't imagine how a now existing WWW client would emulate seqed 
(or any other interactive program)? POST request sent and results received
on every single keystroke ?

More information about the Info-gcg mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net