<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>SyMenu - General discussion &amp; questions - The fully customizable menu: beta version - Messages</title>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<description>SyMenu - General discussion &amp; questions - The fully customizable menu: beta version - Messages</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:31:15 GMT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:31:15 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Mehdroid</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hi hi! nice work on the beta so far. I am trying it out now and no issues as of yet.<br/><br/>PS I love Symenu!]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 05:31:15 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from VVV_Easy_Symenu</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hello,<br/>Finally this it is a antivirus issue.<br/>I remembered the antivirus. In this computer was "free avast 10.3.2223" I have upgraded to "11.1.2245" and beta versions run well.<br/><br/>Thank you very much for your attention and<br/>Happy New year!!!]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2016 13:58:14 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[@VVV_Easy_Symenu<br/>I've just send to you a message to your mail. Check it please.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:24:33 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from VVV_Easy_Symenu</title>
<description><![CDATA[I just changed the executable SyMenu.exe "stable" version with the executable last "beta" version (copy and paste) and SyMenu no longer works.<br/>It hangs even before displaying anything with three processes launched.<br/>I can not kill these processes. I tried without sucess with Task Manager and with FileGovenor:<br/><br/><img src="att2" border="0"><br/><br/>In a second try I have revised with System Explorer:<br/><br/><img src="att1" border="0"><br/><br/>After restarting the computer (for killing the hanged processes) I changed the executable SyMenu.exe last "beta" version with the executable SyMenu.exe "stable" version (copy and paste) and SyMenu returns working fine.<br/><i>edited by VVV_Easy_Symenu on 31/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:27:58 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hi Drakkn.<br/>I sent to you a mail with instructions related to your issue. Let me know.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2015 08:10:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Drakkn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I found another issue. When using my menu on certain computers the main menu gets shortened with arrows at the top and bottom. There is plenty of room on the screen for the full menu to show. It also uses the small pre beta arrow bars instead of the big ones.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:35:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[@VVV_Easy_Symenu<br/>I need you to do a test.<br/>In the computer where you find the problem, copy the executable file SyMenu.exe from the last beta package to your old folder where the working version is located. Well do a backup of your working executable file before...<br/>Now execute SyMenu. SyMenu should load correctly, but when you open the Options form (configuration - advanced - options) you should have the hang problem again.<br/>Is it correct?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:57:41 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from VVV_Easy_Symenu</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hello,<br/>Something strange happened to me with the new beta version: it not work anymore in one computer.<br/>In this computer even with a new downloaded file, in a completely new folder I don't arrive to get the First Configuration procedure with any of three betas versions. But the estable SyMenu works fine!<br/>I think it happens after a file synchronization with the host computer (perhaps SyMenu was running and some system  dll is jammed? when I tried to run the any beta I can see that there are three processes SyMenu open but with 0% CPU)<br/>I have restarted the computer several times (verifying that SyMenu process was closed) without success. The OS is Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1.<br/><br/><br/>Fortunately using the the stable version files over the current folders (I don't use the new features) all run without losing settings or installed programs.<br/><i>edited by VVV_Easy_Symenu on 30/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:35:12 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Drakkn</title>
<description><![CDATA[That did the trick. Thanks!]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:20:35 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[It is possible that the & symbol creates some problems because the .NET compiler use it as a shortcut symbol for a context menu.<br/>If you want to use the ampersand symbol simply escape it doubling it (&&).<br/>Example:<br/>My item & yours - becoms - My item && yours]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:32:14 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Drakkn</title>
<description><![CDATA[Great job with all these new changes! I'm really liking it.<br/> I noticed 1 bug and wanted to let you know. If I use an & symbol it doesn't show up in the menu. I'm trying to use it in a folder and the & symbol doesn't show up. It places the space before and after but the symbol is not there. I'm not sure if there are any other symbols that do not work but I definitely noticed that one.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:17:49 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[As I said, I'm OK with that, I sorta get what you're saying. Not being a programmer it's difficult to understand exactly why these things can't be done!<br/><br/>Anyway, the betas are great, though not sure if I noticed a bug yesterday as the menu wouldn't hide once either options or config window were opened. I'll check more thoroughly when I get a chance but may not be for a week or so due to Christmas. <br/><br/>Talking of which, have a good one, ho ho ho!]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2015 11:22:54 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>So, in setting up some command line parameters, I noticed that in the manual section titled "Command line" that the modifier  "CRTL" is mentioned.  I didn't test if it worked <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />  I just spelled it "CTRL" and that worked <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /></blockquote><br/>Yes it was a typo. Now it is correct.<br/><br/>@Glenn<br/>The mysterious tale of the -cv flag.<br/>I'm sorry if you lost so much time to experiment but, although this feature is completely ready, I'm still experimenting on the syntax.<br/>According to your tests I will restrict the freedom in creating custom variable name. The mess in the expanding result is caused because you can use whatever syntax you want and this is a problem in some cases.<br/><br/>So in the final version you'll have:<br/>command line -&gt; SyMenu <i>-cvkey=customText </i>-&gt; tooltip template -&gt; <i>bla bla bla %key% bla bla bla</i> -&gt; expands in -&gt; <i>bla bla bla </i><i><i>customText</i> bla bla bla<br/></i>In your template you'll be forced to enclose the key inside the % symbols like the native SyMenu variable to maintain consistency. In your command line the % symbols won't be required. If the key, the value or both have some spaces inside you must enclose them in double quotes.<br/><br/>That'all.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Should I infer from this that SyMenu variables do not need enclosing %  to be expanded?  Is that intentional?</blockquote><br/>Absolutely not. The native SyMenu variables need the enclosing %. In the final version the custom variables need them too in the template while they don't need in the command line.<br/><br/><br/><b>sl23</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>To explain... If the menu is based on custom structures why not allow  one custom structure to be saved to html file and be recalled when  clicking button</blockquote><br/>Simply because even the base and advanced menu, when selected, are already saved in the xml configuration file.<br/>If you choose the advanced menu, close SyMenu, and have a look at the configuration file, you'll find that there is no parameter like  advancedMenuStructure="true"  or similar and instead you will find the tags that describe the advanced menu exactly in the same way you'll find your custom menu.<br/>Advanced and base menu don't exist at the configuration level. It only exists a certain configuration that could be equal to advanced or base or whatever you want.<br/>The only place where the advanced and base configuration really exist is inside the buttons that create those configuration that could be considered as particular custom configurations.<br/>The only way to accomplish what you are requiring is to store in a different tag the last known menu configuration that is different from the advanced and base ones... bizarre. Well it's not your idea to be bizarre but the only way I have to implement it.<br/><br/>I finished my words, I don't know how else to explain that <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/><br/>Ok guys, let's take a break. Tonight is Christmas so stay with your family and leave SyMenu into the drawer <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/>Merry Christmas to you and thanks for helping me so much.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2015 09:15:14 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>No this is and will be impossible because the menu is always built with a custom structure. When you choose and save advanced or base structure you are simply choosing one particular custom structure, not a built in one. I don't know if now it is clearer.</blockquote><br/>Er... sorry no, not really any clearer <img src="images/smilies/confused.gif" border="0" alt="Confused" /><br/>It sounds contradictory, but that's probably my interpretation! I haven't had much sleep the last few months! To explain... If the menu is based on custom structures why not allow one custom structure to be saved to html file and be recalled when clicking button?<br/><br/>I'm not trying to push this as personally I will never require it, but thought it could save some users some hassle.<br/><br/>I'm sure if you say it's not possible then that's the case, as I said, probably my poor interpretation! It's fine by me to leave as is, just trying to help improve things a little <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 23:46:47 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>A third beta is available.</blockquote><br/>Maybe your examples were intended to show the use of Windows environment variable values as names for SyMenu variables?  Since I started SyMenu from a batch file, that is effectively what I was getting, because Windows does interpret % syntax inside ".  When I used -cv"%%foo%%=bar" then the expansion happened, without % being left behind, as they were with -cvfoo=bar.<br/><br/>Should I infer from this that SyMenu variables do not need enclosing % to be expanded?  Is that intentional?  It might raise havoc with some command lines if text on the command line happened to match a SyMenu variable name (and yes, even if command lines are not presently expanded, I hope they can be someday).]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 22:50:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>A third beta is available.</blockquote><br/><br/>So, in setting up some command line parameters, I noticed that in the manual section titled "Command line" that the modifier  "CRTL" is mentioned.  I didn't test if it worked <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />  I just spelled it "CTRL" and that worked <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/>In the beta 3 comments at the top of this thread, it gives -cv examples:<br/>Some examples here: -cvfoo1=text -cv%foo2%=text -cv"foo3=text" -cv"%foo foo 4%"=text -cv"%foo foo 5%=text text"<br/><br/>It is clear that the "" have to be around all the stuff with spaces, but don't have to include spaces. That I think I understand.<br/><br/>It is _not_ clear whether variables can be named with % as part of the name. I'm not sure how it could be referenced, or else I don't understand the syntax for referencing such names. I have experimentally determined that -cv"%foo%=bar" does not result in a reference to "%foo%" being expanded. So the manual needs to be more verbose to explain the usefulness of the example, or else the example may be in error?<br/><br/>%BIT% gets expanded in tooltips, with the "%BIT%" gets replaced with "x64-based PC". However, -cv"smhk=C+F2" gets expanded in tooltips, with the % left behind! That is "%smhk%" gets replaced with "%c+f2%". This was surprising... both the % staying around, and the value being lowercase!]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 22:29:33 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[No this is and will be impossible because the menu is always built with a custom structure. When you choose and save advanced or base structure you are simply choosing one particular custom structure, not a built in one. I don't know if now it is clearer.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:53:34 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[Superb!!! Works a treat, and much better using Title as a Container, thanks Gian you've done a great job <img src="images/smilies/thumb.gif" border="0" alt="Thumbs Up" /><br/><br/>Btw, when I said about losing config when clicking Base or Advanced I mean once chosen you can't revert back. So I thought maybe have a user button that can revert to your own preset?<br/><i>edited by sl23 on 23/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:30:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[A third beta is available.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 19:49:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>sl23</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>I'm confused?! You say it's a good idea for advanced users  then say not to do it as they know where to find it!</blockquote><br/>I'm  speaking about the default advanced menu not a customized one. My  question was: if you press the button advanced menu, do I have to  include options item or not? Anyway you can add it by your own. Well I'm thinking to remove from the default advanced menu other items, that naturally remain available from the library on the right hand side. Don't ask what, I have to think about that, but if you have some suggestions let me know.<br/><br/><b>sl23</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>If you accidentally click one of these buttons your config is lost.</blockquote><br/>It's not true. If you accidentally click one of the two button (advanced or base) you should accidentally click the OK or Apply button too. If you click Cancel instead your previous configuration is preserved.<br/>Anyway you are right and I will implement it, but now I would like to focus on the current feature without adding some more.<br/><br/>@Glenn<br/>I agree we should speak a lot about the import/export feature before starting to analyze it but for now I tell you that from the next beta you'll have the custom variables for the tooltip passed by the command line <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 15:43:01 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote><br/>And again yes your argument is correct: the direct access to options is a useful shortcut for advanced users not basic ones. <br/>The question now is: do I have to add the shortcut option item in the standard advanced menu configuration? Well for the same reason I don't think so because an advanced user knows where to find it and how to activate it.</blockquote><br/>I'm confused?! You say it's a good idea for advanced users then say not to do it as they know where to find it! Only advanced users should have direct access to options, so it should be hidden out of sight for base users. If a base user decides to access options, a little exploration will show them where it is! That's how you become an advanced user, by exploring the unknown.<br/><br/><b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>The compact menu was a pain to maintain exactly because of the modifiers integratated in the title. The title from the compact menu and from the normal menu are infact different components and I had to implement, test, document all the new features twice. Besides the pinned feature was unavailable in the compact menu and impossible to implement.<br/>Now we have a single title element that includes the ability to have drop down items (you'll find it in the next beta... yes I confirm that I am forced to release another beta maybe already tomorrow...). So the only lost feature is the integrated action modifier tool, the most buggy one.</blockquote><br/>I'm fine with the lack of compact menu, I also like the idea of using the title as a container for menu structure.<br/><br/><b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>The idea to disable single modifiers is viable. If you start SyMenu in elevated mode you'll see that the elevate modifier is already disabled, so extend this feature to others via options is possible. Low priority for this feature.</blockquote><br/>No problem, hopefully it'll get added in the not too distant future.<br/><br/><b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>I won't implement another button to set the compact menu. You have the base menu and the advanced menu. If you like a menu similar to the compact one you press the advanced button and drag search, my computer, plugin and tools inside the title item. </blockquote><br/>That's ok, but perhaps the ability to save maybe one user preset? If you accidentally click one of these buttons your config is lost.<br/><br/>Regards<br/><i>edited by sl23 on 23/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:54:30 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Gianluca</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>For people like Glenn that manage a lot of SyMenu instances I'll implement an import and export feature which allows you to choose the options you want to export and the ones you want to import. In that way you can reproduce all or part of the settings of your master SyMenu. But I don't know when I can do that. For now you can manually operate at file level modifing the SyMenuConfig.zip file.</blockquote><br/><br/>We should discuss this at length before you start implementing such an import/export feature.  Copy and tweak gets quite far.  Command line variables would get quite a bit further, enabling to pass a few parameters to internal commends.  Selecting (depending on how, of course) a large subset of options to Import/export sounds like a cumbersome way to copy and tweak... probably would take lots of clicks, probably would take lots of different dialogs where different types of things could be chosen.  The only thing I can't figure out how to do with "copy and tweak" and "variables", is to enable the visibility of a command. So I'll extend my notion of where variables could be useful to an option in each SyItem to specify a variable to check to decide whether it should be displayed or not <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />  Similar to not displaying Configuration menu item if SyMenu is READONLY, but more general.  Well, that is the start of the discussion. It can be continued here, in a different thread, or privately, as you choose.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:12:19 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Yes the password to options is useless because this scenario it's already managed by the read only option. <br/>And again yes your argument is correct: the direct access to options is a useful shortcut for advanced users not basic ones. <br/>The question now is: do I have to add the shortcut option item in the standard advanced menu configuration? Well for the same reason I don't think so because an advanced user knows where to find it and how to activate it.<br/><br/>The compact menu was a pain to maintain exactly because of the modifiers integratated in the title. The title from the compact menu and from the normal menu are infact different components and I had to implement, test, document all the new features twice. Besides the pinned feature was unavailable in the compact menu and impossible to implement.<br/>Now we have a single title element that includes the ability to have drop down items (you'll find it in the next beta... yes I confirm that I am forced to release another beta maybe already tomorrow...). So the only lost feature is the integrated action modifier tool, the most buggy one.<br/><br/>The idea to disable single modifiers is viable. If you start SyMenu in elevated mode you'll see that the elevate modifier is already disabled, so extend this feature to others via options is possible. Low priority for this feature.<br/><br/>I won't implement another button to set the compact menu. You have the base menu and the advanced menu. If you like a menu similar to the compact one you press the advanced button and drag search, my computer, plugin and tools inside the title item. <br/>It's not an hard operation. <br/>For people like Glenn that manage a lot of SyMenu instances I'll implement an import and export feature which allows you to choose the options you want to export and the ones you want to import. In that way you can reproduce all or part of the settings of your master SyMenu. But I don't know when I can do that. For now you can manually operate at file level modifing the SyMenuConfig.zip file.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 09:10:05 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[That's a tricky decision! I suppose it should only be in the advanced menu. Should basic users require access to options they can still access it via the current method, maybe? This way, advanced users have the quick access and base users sort of have it hidden to avoid doing something they shouldn't. How about a password access to the options? For situations where you don't want users to access the options? Or is that the same as ReadOnly?<br/><br/>Also, regarding Modifiers, would it be possible to hide ones that are never used? I'm curious why you removed the compact menu? I much preferred that. If that can be integrated with customisation of the menu, as in the beta, then when cycling through Modifiers, ability to hide those not in use as stated before would be a bonus!<br/><br/>Thanks for your efforts ;-)<br/><i>edited by sl23 on 22/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2015 20:36:36 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[@sl23.<br/>Your idea to create an extra item for accessing the options  form directly is great. You'll surely find it in the next beta or final  version.<br/>A question for you: in your opinion should the new options item be included in the base menu and in the advanced menu?<br/><br/>As Glenn says the compact menu is easy to recreate except for two little details.<br/>1) The action modifiers are no longer integrated in the title, so, if interested, you need an extra item (an extra row) in your menu. In my opinion it is not an issue and if it were, you can now move the exit item to a second level so you will regain the lost room.<br/>The second problem is that the title doesn't allow sub items as it does in the old compact menu, but this issue will be solved in the next beta/final version.<br/><br/>Maybe in future I'll create new built in configuration besides base and advanced. One of those could be the old compact menu but again it is not an issue since you are completely free to build whatever you want now.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:37:34 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[@sl23: I think you can make your own compact menu, but I agree it would be a convenience if there were a button that created "just like old compact menu" and another "just like old complete menu", and then a "minimum" button.  That was part of what I said in my post.<br/><br/>I like your idea of a direct menu to Configuration / Advanced / Options.  Or maybe the possibility of going directly to _any_ of the sub tabs in the Options menu.  People discover over time the areas of SyMenu configuration they use the most, and getting there fast would be good.  That would put more entries in the what is "available", but wouldn't clutter the overall menus except when people configure their menu to include such items.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2015 00:46:17 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[Only two points from my initial startup that could be changed:<br/>1. Bring back the Compact Menu.<br/>2. Add an extra menu item for accessing SyMenu's Options instead of having to open Configuration/Advanced/Options.<br/><br/>Otherwise I agree that there may be advantages of being able to treat these items as if they're a normal SyItem, as I believe Glenn stated above. I haven't read the whole post, so I can't give an objective opinion yet on this.<br/><br/>But so far I like it, apart from the two points above.<br/><br/>Well done and thanks Gian, fantastic work.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2015 23:48:49 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I like the new hover option.]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 09:36:42 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[A new beta is available.]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:25:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[Not sure your timezone, but my timeZZZZZZZZZZZZZone says I must go to bed... that's when the subconscious is most active... second most is in the shower, eh?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:59:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Are we all crazy in this forum? <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/>Well Glenn I'm very grateful to you because your terrific analysis. My TODO list has growing again thanks to your suggestions and this is a good thing if you are asking. <br/>And, yes, the SyBuiltIn item is tickling my mind... now because of you I can't sleep anymore! And the new version hasn't been released yet...]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:57:18 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I may have seen the "information on tooltip" option at some point, but I didn't have "Description checked" That is the cure!]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:54:16 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[OK, you know the code, I don't. You convince me that implementation alternative 1 is too hard to be practical.<br/><br/>Implementation alternative 2 is an "end run" around the super class. Instead of a super class, there is a new SyBuiltIn subclass of SyItem, and when it gets clicked, it forwards that click to the "hidden" actual builtin, which uses its current class. On the surface, this sounds easy, but I realize there may be limitations that are not obvious.<br/><br/>Your new beta, and even the old regular and compact modes of operation, prove that the builtins, except maybe for title, are not tied to a particular position in the menu structure, but can be configured at any point in the menu structure. So this gives me a small hope that "SyBuiltIn" might be significantly easier, implementation-wise.<br/><br/>Your new features will still be useful and appreciated, just not quite as useful as they potentially could be. Perhaps an implementation that wouldn't be nearly as complex as the super class, but rather somewhat practical, will come to you in a dream: now that your conscious thought has explored the idea enough to reject it, your subconscious may develop a solution <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />  Well, I can hope <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:48:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Why can there only be one Tools container? Shouldn't it be more like Separator, that putting it in the active menu still leaves it available?  For that matter, why can there only be one of most of the built-ins?</blockquote><br/>Yes sure, in future we can have more than one element for passive items. Tools is one of them. For now you have one only because its name is not customizable. The not passive elements will be available in one copy only.<br/><br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Not sure if the title-bar bugginess extends to the icon bar idea</blockquote><br/>Me neither. We'll see.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>One thing I'll mention again, but really only in passing... if the menu names are blank, and all there is is an icon, and size shrank, you almost get a vertical icon bar.  It is about 3 times wider than the left-aligned icon, though.  Together with vertical separators, you could make a little icon grid!</blockquote><br/>Well the problem is not in showing the icons only, it is in the vertical separator. I'll study that.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Not sure [...] if you just have a minimum width coded. If it disappeared, it would be even more grid-like.</blockquote><br/>It's coded but honestly I don't remember why <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> I'll do some experiment about.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>After taking my names away from my menu items, all of which were pointers to documentation files, I noted that the tooltip showed the path to the file, rather than the description, and rather than both path and description in two lines. Why have a description, if it doesn't show?</blockquote><br/>Maybe it is a bug. An item without a name shows a full tooltip. The source for tooltip is decided by you in the general options form.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:47:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[I fully understand your point of view but changing a program so vast like SyMenu at its roots means rewrite almost entirely the code base. <br/>Creating a new super class and inheriting the built-in items and the user items from it is not like creating a new child class. It means that every element, graphical and not, must be rewritten to deal with the super class and not with two different classes.<br/>I can evaluate this change in at least 40 man-days work and for this reason it's outside my possibilities.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:33:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[OK, the bug is triggered when I used the  less-than Separator greater-than   (but with the symbols) name of your menu line in the text. No doubt it is the less-than and greater-than symbols that triggered the error.  In fact, now that I know what it is, the error message was sort of descriptive, and included the text it didn't like, but I didn't realize that at first.  Of course, I have to convert those symbols in pasting in the error message also:<br/><br/> A potentially dangerous Request.Form value was detected from the client (ctl00$AspNetForumContentPlaceHolder$tbMsg="...more like less-than Separator greater-than, that pu...").]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:08:46 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA["Tools"... why is it different?  Because the contents and positioning are different... if the items were unified, then Tools would just be a SyContainer... Why can there only be one Tools container? Shouldn't it be more like Separator, that putting it in the active menu still leaves it available?  For that matter, why can there only be one of most of the built-ins?<br/><br/>"vertical separator"... I know it is in basic Windows popup menu features, but not whether it is included in whatever abstractions you are using.  I find them very nice for grouping option choices.<br/><br/>"hovering over Start Menu", "not showing READONLY items", Nothing more to say here!<br/><br/>Title bar... you can put my thoughts on the shelf with the buggy feature <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/>icon bar... never heard of RocketDock... I use something called FreeLaunchBar, which has that sort of hover on an icon, get a menu sort of feature. It is less capable than SyMenu, being all static, and tied to a particular machine, but that aspect of the interface is nice.  Not sure if the title-bar bugginess extends to the icon bar idea, the icon bar aspect might have been the source of the bugginess, or might not have.<br/><br/>One thing I'll mention again, but really only in passing... if the menu names are blank, and all there is is an icon, and size shrank, you almost get a vertical icon bar.  It is about 3 times wider than the left-aligned icon, though.  Together with vertical separators, you could make a little icon grid!<br/><br/>Not sure if the 3 times wider part is a limitation of the Windows menus, or of your tools, or if you just have a minimum width coded. If it disappeared, it would be even more grid-like.<br/><br/>After taking my names away from my menu items, all of which were pointers to documentation files, I noted that the tooltip showed the path to the file, rather than the description, and rather than both path and description in two lines. Why have a description, if it doesn't show?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:05:09 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[On we go to smaller topics...<br/><br/>"rename and user description"  So in the "unified" Menu structure, these would be the only things that could be edited in the main Configuration Panel for BuiltIn items.<br/><br/>Minimum entries ... "current solution"... The current solution of not being able to delete the minimum entries is fine, actually, I just didn't figure out that that solution was in place! After all, I only spent a few hours with it, whereas you have spent days/weeks creating it.  Of course, I'll quibble that I can't currently move Exit into a SyContainer <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:02:57 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[Actually, I was using the compact menu. I noticed the Beta showed extra stuff, but with all the features to rearrange it, no big deal.<br/><br/>"nearly fully configurable menu".  Hmm.  This is the biggest item, and probably also the hardest to implement, but then eliminating that word "nearly" would be very, very nice. Let me attempt to persuade you...<br/><br/>"must remain separated by design because they are completely different elements".  Well, _all_ the elements are completely different. A menu full of the same element would not be interesting <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/>The differences you describe are mostly implementation sorts of differences. The user interface should drive the implementation, rather than the implementation limiting the interface, in general. Obviously that cannot always be achieved, but this sort of thing would seem to lend itself to one of two solutions I can think of, or maybe others. I'll list the ones I thought of in the next two paragraphs for inspiration, but any solution that meets the goal of a more flexible menu structure is acceptable, of course. Then I comment on the specific "reasons" you gave for them being different.<br/><br/>1. No doubt the built-in elements do not derive from the same "SyItem" class. So, make a super class MenuItem that is union of SyItem and BuiltIn <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> Then they can be treated the same, for menu structure manipulation. For editing and implementation, they are treated different, but the super class tells you which subclass it is.<br/><br/>2. So if the differences are so extreme that you must have special handling for the items, and know exactly where they are, can you not just build a table of the active built-ins (the ones that are in the menu structure) on the side, and then have a special "SyBuiltIn" that acts like a normal user menu entry, and points to the right table entry? Your current Beta implementation must almost work that way anyway... except that you didn't call the menu structure items SyBuiltIn <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/><br/>"variable labels".... sure... you agreed later they could be renamed, but the initial values do come from translation tables. So that is different than SyItems, that do not have initial values for names/ descriptions. But once initialized, they both look like menu items.<br/><br/>"not subject to action modifiers".... sure... but that would be true whether they are at the top, bottom, or middle.<br/><br/>"could be filled on opening".... again, true whether they are at the top, bottom, or middle.<br/><br/>"contain an entire new world".... search seems to cause a flyout box to appear with a search interface.  I don't see why that couldn't happen between two user items.<br/><br/>"They could monitor the SyMenu status".... OK, title bar can stay on top <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> (but really, it is the pinning and moving of the menu that convinces me of this, rather than the status monitoring, per the next item)<br/><br/>"title is needed ... to move the menu, to pin it".... yep, so it should be on top, for those actions.<br/><br/>"placeholder"... well, we can probably agree that we do need user items, or SyMenu wouldn't be too useful.  But I fail to see why any but title need to be separated from built-in items for positioning them anywhere on the menu.<br/><br/>I would like to put My Computer, with its local drive expansions, in a SyContainer called "Explore" together with SyItems that have specific directory lists from the flash drive and/or Dropbox folder, because they do similar things.  I would like to put Exit in a SyContainer called "Lesser used stuff" (well, not exactly that) along with lesser used SyItems like documentation links, rather than it being so prominent... that gets used once per session, maximum, rather than the potentially many times other commands get used.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:01:34 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[My next reply (pasted) also caused the error, which I didn't capture or report last time. If there is a place to report them, I've saved both the full error message, and my full text that cause this second error.  The next trick will be to figure out what part of the reply caused the error.  So my reply will be numerous... I will "divide and conquer" and submit parts of the reply in separate messages in hopes of determining what causes the error. First time around I lost it, and the recreated text passed the checks.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:00:33 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /> Ok Gleen. It is enough to change my mind about the beta value.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>I just noted you spoke of a breaking change, and but didn't say how or where the break was [...] <br/>If something is incompatible, though, you should mention what it is[...]<br/>If it is just the "compact menu" feature going away[...]</blockquote><br/>The breaking change regards the menu structure and precisely the compact menu only. If you've already have a valid configuration, it'll be preserved entirely but if you chose a compact menu, it'll be replaced by the advanced one. This is the only breaking change but since you are using the advance menu, it doesn't affect you. <br/>You are right I should be more accurate to describe it. Sorry it was my first time with a public beta <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>I was surprised not to find the new menu structure feature in the main configuration panel.  And, I'm surprised that the "User items placeholder" exists... that is the antithesis of "fully configurable menu", because it artificially requires that there be no mixing of user items and built-in menu items.</blockquote><br/>Ok we can change the feature name in "nearly fully configurable menu" if you prefer.<br/>The menu structure concern the built-in elements so its correct place is inside the Options form.<br/>The built-in elements and the user custom elements must remain separated by design because they are completely different elements. Think that the built-in elements have variable labels according with your current language, they are not subjected to the action modifiers, they could be filled on opening (think about the drive units in My Computer or the My Computer itself that changes the drive units according with the removable drives available at opening), they could contain an entire new world also (think about the search item and how it works), they could monitor the SyMenu status (think about the title bar with the feedback icons for the pinned, the readonly, and the moving status). <br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>What is truly the minimum menu structure required to operate SyMenu?  I think it is "configuration" and "Exit".</blockquote><br/>According to my analysis the title is needed too, because it allows to move the menu, to pin it, and to monitor the read only status.<br/>The second required element is the placeholder for user custom items.<br/>So my vote goes to: title, configuration, user item placeholder, exit. Anyway the poll is open!<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Everything else should be optional, and even those should be able to be renamed by the user, and described by the user (like all the SyItems have editable name and description fields).</blockquote><br/>Well Glenn I've just created this new feature and it was a huge effort... we have time to improve it <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/>Anyway I like the idea to rename the built-in element too and to supply a user description. It's in my TODO list now.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>So if a user-modified menu structure doesn't contain the minimum entries somewhere, either they should get an error at save time, or those minimum entries should be added to the bottom of the top-level menu structure. I prefer the former, but either would be acceptable.</blockquote><br/>I think I will leave the current solution. Why don't you mention it? You can't drag away a mandatory build-in element but you can move it wherever you want. In my opinion it works properly and better than throwing an error during the saving.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>"Tools" seems be just a "SyContainer" with a fancy icon.</blockquote><br/>Yep. But since it is a different kind of animal than a SyContainer, I have to create it in a different mode and can't be mixed with user items.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>Would be nice to have a vertical separator also, for multi-column menus. I've mentioned before regarding large scrolling menus (folder lists, installed programs lists) that it would be nice if they were split in columns like the original Windows 95 Start menu...</blockquote><br/>Nice. I'll investigate for that. I not even know if it is possible with the components I'm using for SyMenu...<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>It would be nice if simply hovering over the Start Menu button displayed the start menu, rather than requiring a click. Maybe that should be optional.</blockquote><br/>Consider it done!<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>It would be nice if, when in READONLY mode, the built-in items that cannot be performed would not be shown in the menus, even if they are configured.</blockquote><br/>Right! It's in the TODO list.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>You mentioned in another thread about having everything in the title bar.</blockquote><br/>It's gone now. The title bar, similarly to the Tools and My Computer items, could contain elements, but I preferred to avoid a title bar with this ability because it was really buggy. Maybe it will come back in future.<br/><br/><b>Glenn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>It would be nice if an icon on the icon bar could be the icon for a container, and hovering would produce a flyout menu. Item icons would produce the description tool tip when hovered. Note, hovering is not something that can be done on a touch screen.  Not sure what the replacement is, if any.[...]</blockquote><br/>Are you describing something else than SyMenu? Like RocketDock? <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/>Well this would be a completely new direction to explore. For now I'll leave it.<br/><br/>Well don't trust too much this forum editor... sometimes it loses the messages while you are writing it. I hope the jitbit guys will improve it.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 08:43:29 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[The beta version took the existing configuration fine. I just noted you spoke of a breaking change, and but didn't say how or where the break was, so it wasn't clear whether or not existing configurations would work or not.<br/><br/>If something is incompatible, though, you should mention what it is, so people can deal with it appropriately.  If it is just the "compact menu" feature going away, it seems that you could have a "standard" configuration for each of the "regular" and "compact" menus, and maybe another for "minimum" and maybe another for "maximum" and start with corresponding configurations, based on the old choice between "compact" or not.<br/><br/>I was surprised not to find the new menu structure feature in the main configuration panel.  And, I'm surprised that the "User items placeholder" exists... that is the antithesis of "fully configurable menu", because it artificially requires that there be no mixing of user items and built-in menu items.<br/><br/>What is truly the minimum menu structure required to operate SyMenu?  I think it is "configuration" and "Exit".  Everything else should be optional, and even those should be able to be renamed by the user, and described by the user (like all the SyItems have editable name and description fields).<br/><br/>So if a user-modified menu structure doesn't contain the minimum entries somewhere, either they should get an error at save time, or those minimum entries should be added to the bottom of the top-level menu structure. I prefer the former, but either would be acceptable.<br/><br/>Every other built-in menu item should be configurable just like other SyItems, and separators. The Item Manager menu item should either be split in 2 or 3 (Item manager, add SyItem (currently in Item Manager), add built-in item (currently in the Available elements panel). Or those could become flyout menus in Item Manager (but that would be more cumbersome to use).<br/><br/>"Tools" seems be just a "SyContainer" with a fancy icon. I don't mind, but maybe all you need to ship is the icon.<br/><br/>Would be nice to have a vertical separator also, for multi-column menus. I've mentioned before regarding large scrolling menus (folder lists, installed programs lists) that it would be nice if they were split in columns like the original Windows 95 Start menu... you'd have to figure the screen height and item height to know where to put the column separators. But for user menus, the user would specify, so you wouldn't have to know.<br/><br/>It would be nice if simply hovering over the Start Menu button displayed the start menu, rather than requiring a click. Maybe that should be optional.<br/><br/>It would be nice if, when in READONLY mode, the built-in items that cannot be performed would not be shown in the menus, even if they are configured. That would avoid confusing the users that can't use them anyway.<br/><br/><br/>You mentioned in another thread about having everything in the title bar. I don't see where/how to do that, but maybe that isn't in the public Beta? From other things icons that encroached the title bar, and from your vague comment, it sounds interesting, though. Is the title bar in the "minimum set"? Maybe it shouldn't be. But maybe an icon bar could be an option, so one could have more than one of them?  Title bar + icon bar might be nice, sometimes.  Since I haven't seen it, and haven't figured out how to experiment with it, here are some random thoughts that may not be relevant...<br/><br/>It would be nice if an icon on the icon bar could be the icon for a container, and hovering would produce a flyout menu. Item icons would produce the description tool tip when hovered. Note, hovering is not something that can be done on a touch screen.  Not sure what the replacement is, if any.<br/><br/>If one does get their useful menu structure down to only an icon bar, could it have an option to be either vertical or horizontal?  Or if all items in the top level menu structure have no names, just icons and descriptions, does the width shrink enough so that it looks like a vertical icon bar?<br/><br/>If one does get their useful menu structure down to only an icon bar, could it substitute for the floating Start Menu button?<br/><br/>Is the above an adequate response to make a public Beta worthwhile? I promise I didn't install it in production!]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 06:48:38 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I should know better.  I wrote a huge message here, with lots of feedback, and when I submitted it, it got an error, and it is all gone.  I should always write more than one line of text somewhere besides in a web form...  I should always write more than one line of text somewhere besides in a web form...  I should always write more than one line of text somewhere besides in a web form...  I should always write more than one line of text somewhere besides in a web form...  I should always write more than one line of text somewhere besides in a web form... penance over, I'll try to recreate the feedback, and paste it in the web form.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 04:05:52 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from sl23</title>
<description><![CDATA[That problem with sentence cutoff also happens in the error message windows in sps builder.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:29:07 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hi Glenn.<br/>Which kind of incompatibility you've found starting from your existing configuration? Can you detail that more? It could be useful.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2015 09:40:13 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Glenn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I'll soon find out if it will start from an existing configuration... but it might be nice to warn people that want to try it. I know you said it is incompatible... but not how or where incompatible <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" /><br/><br/>Thanks for READONLY.Mercury  Good to see it coming.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2015 08:38:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[@VVV_Easy_Symenu<br/>Great! I fixed the bug blindly because I've never been able to reproduce it.<br/><br/>@Ilias<br/>I know, it's a problem for several languages but there is no solution (we are not in a web context where the text can flow). You should change the cutted sentences or use abbreviations]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2015 09:14:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Ilias</title>
<description><![CDATA[I really like the ability to change the menu structure.<br/><br/>I have i preexisted problem, sometime the sentence is so big that is being cut by the frame.<br/><br/><img src="att1" border="0">]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 13:15:26 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from VVV_Easy_Symenu</title>
<description><![CDATA[The  "Empty Trash"  feature works in Spanish Traslation <img src="http://www.ugmfree.it/Forum/images/smilies/smile.gif" border="0"><br/><br/><img src="att1" border="0"><br/>.<br/><i>edited by VVV_Easy_Symenu on 13/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 10:12:39 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Ok url fixed.<br/>It's an interesting bug of the link function for this forum editor. If you use the hyperlink button instead of publish the link directly it convert your absolute url in a relative one to the root of the forum.<br/>I have to report the bug to the jitbit guys <img src="images/smilies/smile.gif" border=0 alt="smile" />]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 08:32:54 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Drakkn</title>
<description><![CDATA[<b>Drakkn</b> wrote:<br/><blockquote>I can't download it from the link. It says the file is not found.</blockquote><br/><br/><br/>Edit:<br/><br/>I see what happened. The link tries to be "http://www.ugmfree.it/Forum/www.ugmfree.it/public/SyMenuBeta/SyMenu.4.14.5824.beta.zip"<br/><br/>The link needs to be <a href="http://www.ugmfree.it/public/SyMenuBeta/SyMenu.4.14.5824.beta.zip" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.ugmfree.it/public/SyMenuBeta/SyMenu.4.14.5824.beta.zip</a> <br/><br/>I grabbed it and will sure test it out!]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 02:34:52 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Drakkn</title>
<description><![CDATA[I can't download it from the link. It says the file is not found.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 02:28:27 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<link>https://www.ugmfree.it/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=400</link>
<title>Message from Gianluca</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hi.<br/><br/>I'm working on a new version to implement a great feature: the completely customizable menu.<br/>When this version is released you'll be able to decide which elements to include in your menu and in which position. Naturally the current normal and compact menu will disappear because they are only two of the multiple configuration. I think this is the first breaking changes in all the SyMenu history.<br/><br/>Since this implementation is really complex I decided to release a public beta if someone wants to test it. <br/>I'm not for the public beta versions, I think they are useless because people download them to use them and not to test them, but I could make a mistake so I'm ready to be disproved.<br/><br/>Don't use this version as your main one because it is really buggy and you can easily lose your configuration.<br/>If you mess your menu and SyMenu doesn't load anymore or has some problems, you can reload the program with a particular command line argument (-msnormal) that reset your menu to the base one.<br/><br/>There are other main new features:<br/><ul><li>The file flag READONLY can be ineffective for a certain PC if the file name is followed by a dot and the machine name. For example READONLY.Mercury file makes SyMenu runs in readonly mode for every machine except for the PC called Mercury;</li><li>The contextual menus scrollable buttons are now bigger to simplify the use on touch screen devices.</li></ul>  <br/>Here is the download link. Let me know.<br/><i>[updated]</i><br/><br/><br/><b>2015.12.17 Second beta version</b><br/>With this second version I solved various bugs besides implementing some minor features:<br/><ul><li>There is a new option to show the contextual menu on start button mouse hover<br/></li><li>I fix a memory leak when thousands of elements are added<br/></li><li>The shortcuts to make the search bar appear and to change the current action modifier work only if the menu structure includes the corresponding element</li></ul> <i>[updated]</i><br/><br/><br/><b>2015.12.23 Third beta version</b><br/>Other bugs solved and some new features:<br/><ul><li>The title element in the contextual menu can contain child elements, it's more similar to the old compact menu (R.I.P.)<br/></li><li>There is a new command line for user custom variables. The new flag is -cv (custom variable) followed from a key=value structure. The -cv flag could recur multiple times. Some examples here: -cvfoo1=text -cv%foo2%=text -cv"foo3=text" -cv"%foo foo 4%"=text -cv"%foo foo 5%=text text"</li><li>I introduced a new element in contextual menu to directly go to SyMenu options  </li></ul> <a href="http://www.ugmfree.it/public/SyMenuBeta/SyMenu.4.14.5835.beta.zip" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.ugmfree.it/public/SyMenuBeta/SyMenu.4.14.5835.beta.zip</a><br/><i>edited by Gianluca on 23/12/2015</i>]]></description>
<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2015 22:15:38 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
